Sri.Virupakshayyaswami S/O ... vs Sri.Chandrakanth Sadashiv Sonar
2022 Latest Caselaw 13050 Kant

                            1




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                     DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                          BEFORE

          THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.100613 OF 2019 (DEC/INJ)


BETWEEN:

SRI.VIRUPAKSHAYYASWAMI
S/O MANAYYASWAMI MATAD
AGE:66 YEARS, OCC:PEETADIKARI
R/O: VARAVI, TQ:SHIRAHATTI,
DIST:GADAG-582120.
                                               ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI V.R.PATIL, ADVOCATE, (ABSENT))

AND:

1.     SRI.CHANDRAKANTH SADASHIV SONAR
       AGE:52 YRS, OCC:BUSINESS,
       R/O HOUSE NO 204
       3RD STAGE MERCHANT RINO APARTMENT,
       2ND CROSS GANDINAGAR BALLARI,
       TQ/DIST: BALLARI-583103.

2.     SRI MOHAN SIDRAYAPPA NARAGUND
       AGE:45 YEARS, OCC:MARKETING
       R/O ITAGI, TQ:SHIRAHATTI, DIST:GADAG,
       NOW AT MIG 484, 16TH CROSS,
       5TH MAIN ROAD, NAVANAGAR,
       HUBBALLI-580025.

3.     SRI KUSHAL S/O NAGAPPA HUBBALLI
       AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:INDUSTRIALIST,
       R/O: VEERANARAYAN TEMPLE ROAD,
       NEAR GAJALAXMI TEMPLE, GADAG,
       TQ/DIST: GADAG-582101.
                            2




4.   SRI VISHWANATH SHESHAPPA BADIGER
     AGE:47 YEARS, OCC: JOB,
     R/O: QUARTERS TYPE 4/5,
     NEAR WATER TANK,
     ALAMATTI DAM SITE ALAMATTI,
     TQ:BASAWAN-BAGEWADI,
     DIST:VIJAYPUR-586201.

5.   SRI MANAPPA MALLAPPA KYASAKKI
     AGE:32 YEARS, OCC:AGRIL,
     R/O: VARAVI, TQ: SHIRAHATTI,
     DIST:GADAG 582120.

6.   SRI. NAGALINGAYYA DANAYYA VADEYAR
     AGE:54 YEARS, OCC: INDUSTRIALIST,
     R/O: PATTAR ONI,
     SAVADATTI (SOUDATTI) TQ: SOUDATTI,
     DIST:BELAGAVI-591126.

7.   SRI VISHWAKARM @ MAHESH
     SOMANNA HULBAJAR
     AGE:37 YRS, OCC:INDUSTRIALIST
     R/O GOLD MARKET LAXMESHWAR
     TQ:SHIRAHATTI, DIST:GADAG 582116

8.   SRI GANGAPPA S/O MANAPPA BADIGER
     AGE:62 YEARS, AGRIL, R/O: VARAVI,
     TQ:SHIRAHATTI, DIST:GADAG-582120.
                                          ... RESPONDENTS

      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908, PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.06.2019, PASSED
BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG, IN
R.A.NO.08/2018, THEREBY DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY
THE APPELLANT AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 31.01.2018, PASSED BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
LAXMESHWAR, IN O.S.NO.91/2017.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                               3




                          ORDER

Though the matter is called twice, there is no

representation on behalf of appellant.

The appeal is listed today for orders regarding

non-compliance of office objections.

As could be seen from the appeal papers, the appeal

is filed in the year 2019. Now we are in the month of

November 2022. It's almost been three years since the date

of filing of the appeal, so far office objections are not

complied with.

It appears that the appellant has not instructed the

counsel on record to comply office objections and as already

noted above, though the matter is called twice, there is no

representation on behalf of appellant. Hence, the Regular

Second Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office

objection and also for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE MRK