Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5968 Kant
Judgement Date : 24 August, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:30448
RSA No. 1876 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1876 OF 2021 (INJ)
BETWEEN:
1. SHIVAMMA
W/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA,
AGED 70 YEARS
2. SHIVABASAMMA
D/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA
W/O LATE RAJAPPA,
AGED 53 YEARS
3. BASAVANNA
S/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA,
AGED 50 YEARS
4. ANANDA
S/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T AGED 47 YEARS,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 5. NANJUNDASWAMY
KARNATAKA
S/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA
AGED 44 YEARS,
6. NAGALAMBIKE
D/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA,
AGED 40 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/O. HALLADA BEEDI
RAMASAMUDRA
CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI P. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:30448
RSA No. 1876 of 2021
AND:
1. SUBBANNA
S/O LATE SOMANNA
AGED 56 YEARS,
2. RAJAPPA
S/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA
AGED 65 YEARS
3. BASAVANNA
S/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA,
AGED 58 YEARS
4. PARASHIVAPPA
S/O LATE SHEKDAR MALLAPPA
AGED 70 YEARS,
5. RENUKA
W/O LATE MADAPPA,
AGED 65 YEARS
6. MAHESHA
S/O LATE MADAPPA,
AGED 47 YEARS
ALL ARE R/O HALLADA BEEDI
RAMASAMUDRA
CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS R.S.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.04.2021
PASSED IN RA.No.43/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND CJM, CHAMARAJANAGAR, DISMISSING THE
APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED13.04.2018 PASSED IN OS No.72/2011 ON THE FILE OF
THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) CHAMARAJANAGARA.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:30448
RSA No. 1876 of 2021
ORDER
This matter is listed fourth time for non compliance of
office objections. In the previous date of hearing i.e., on
10.08.2023 also the counsel for appellants was absent,
however in the ends of justice this Court has granted one more
opportunity to pursue the matter on cost of Rs.500/- and made
it clear that if cost not paid and if office objections are not
complied, list the matter for dismissal. In spite of the order, the
counsel for appellant did not complied the office objections and
also not paid the cost. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non
compliance of office objections and non payment of cost.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RHS
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!