Basappa Fakkirappa Undi vs Nagappa Bhimappa Huddar
2022 Latest Caselaw 13104 Kant

                             1




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

 REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.100685 OF 2018 (DEC/INJ)

BETWEEN:

BASAPPA FAKKIRAPPA UNDI
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.

SMT. BASALINGAVVA
W/O BASAPPA UNDI
SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS.

1.   NAGAPPA S/O BASAPPA UNDI
     AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: HOSA TEGUR-580011,
     TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD.

2.   KARIYAPA S/O BASAPPA UNDI
     AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O HOSA TEGUR-580011,
     TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD.

     BHIMAPPA S/O BASAPPA UNDI
     SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.

3.   SMT. SHANTAVVA W/O BHIMAPA UNDI
     AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE,
     R/O: HOSA TEGUR-580011,
     TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD.

4.   SHIVANAND S/O BHIMAPPA UNDI
     AGE. 20 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
     R/O HOSA TEGUR-580011,
     TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD.
                              2




5.     NEELAVVA D/O BHIMAPPA UNDI
       AGE. 19 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
       R/O: HOSA TEGUR-580011,
       TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD.

6.     ANNAPPA S/O BASAPPA UNDI
       AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
       R/O HOSA TEGUR-580011,
       TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD.

7.     MADIVALAPPA S/O BASAPPA UNDI
       AGE. 18 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O: HOSA TEGUR-580011,
       TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD.

8.     SMT. AKKAVVA W/O BASAPPA GADDI
       AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
       R/O: KARADIGUDDA-581201,
       TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.

9.     SMT. MANJULA W/O SHRISHAIL GADDI
       AGE. 20 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
       R/O: KARADIGUDDA-581201,
       TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
                                             ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI S.S. BETURMATH, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))


AND:

1.     NAGAPPA BHIMAPPA HUDDAR
       AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O: TEGUR 580011,
       TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD.

2.     SMT. LAXMIBAI W/O KRISHNAMURTHY
       AGE.58 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
       R/O: REGIMENT TOWN LANDFORD ROAD,
       BANGLOW NO.57, BENGALURU-25.

3.     SMT. ARUNDATI D/O BHIMAPPA DESAI
       AGE.52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
                                3




      R/O REGIMENT TOWN LANDFORD ROAD
      BANGLOW NO.57, BENGALURU-25.

4.    SMT. SUSHEELABAI AMBARISH VARMA DESAI
      AGE.60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
      R/O: BANGALORE H.NO.604,
      2ND CROSS, 3RD BLOCK,
      BENGALURU-34 .
                                        ... RESPONDENTS

      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF the civil procedure code, 1908, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.09.2007, MADE IN
R.A.NO.172/2002, BY the II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.)
DHARWAD, THEREBY CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 05.08.2002, PASSED BY THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE
(JR.DN.) AND JMFC, DHARWAD, IN O.S.NO.245/1994 AND
FURTHER TO DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFFS.

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


                           ORDER

Though the matter is called twice, there is no

representation on behalf of appellants.

The appeal is listed today for orders regarding non-

compliance of office objections for fifth time.

As could be seen from the appeal papers, the appeal

is filed in the year 2018. Now we are in the month of

November 2022. It's almost been four 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 appellants. Hence, the Regular

Second Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office

objection and also for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE MRK