Manohar S/O Ramakrishna Bongale vs Bhimappa S/O Basalingappa Kadli
2022 Latest Caselaw 12794 Kant

                              1




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                    DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                        BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

 REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.2237 OF 2007 (DEC/INJ)


BETWEEN:

MANOHAR
S/O RAMAKRISHNA BONGALE
SINCE DECEASED REP. BY LRS.

1(A). SMT.ANURADHA @ PUSHPA
      D/O MANOHAR BONGALE,
      AGE:45 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD,
      R/O RAVIVARPETH,
      OPP:KADALGIKAR HOSPITAL,
      GOKAK, BELAGAVI.

1(B). SRI NITIN
      S/O MANOHAR BONGALE,
      AGE:32 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS,
      R/O RAVIVARPETH,
      OPP:KADALGIKAR HOSPITAL,
      GOKAK, BELAGAVI.

1(C). SMT.PRIYA
      W/O MAHESH GONDKAR,
      AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC:HOUSE HOLD,
      R/O RAVIVARPETH,
      OPP:KADALGIKAR HOSPITAL,
      GOKAK, BELAGAVI.

1(D). SMT.AMRUTH
      W/O AJAY KUDALKAR,
      AGE:26 YEARS, OCC:HOUSE HOLD,
      R/O RAVIVARPETH,
                               2




       OPP:KADALGIKAR HOSPITAL,
       GOKAK, BELAGAVI.

1(E). KUMARI SHREEDEVI
      D/O MANOHAR BONGALE,
      AGE:22 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT,
      R/O RAVIVARPETH,
      OPP:KADALGIKAR HOSPITAL,
      GOKAK, BELAGAVI.
                                                ...APPELLANTS

[BY SRI.RAMAKRISHNA HEGDE, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)]

AND:

BHIMAPPA
S/O BASALINGAPPA KADLI,
AGE:46 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O BENCHINAMARDI,
GOKAK TALUK, BELAGAVI DIST- 591 307.
                                                ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.S.S.BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE)


      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908, PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 14.06.2007, PASSED
BY THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE SR. DN., GOKAK,
IN R.A.NO.127/2006 REVERSING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 13.09.2006, PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE
JR.DN., GOKAK, IN O.S.NO.326/1997, ETC.,.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

Though matter is called twice, there is no

representation on behalf of appellants.

The captioned appeal is listed in until disposal list.

On 02.11.2022, when the matter was called, there was

no representation on behalf of appellants. Today also

there is no representation on behalf of appellants.

As could be seen from the appeal papers, the

appeal is filed in the year 2007. Now we are in the month

of November 2022. As already noted above, though

matter is called yesterday and today, there is no

representation on behalf of appellants. Hence, this

Regular Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

MRK