Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5992 Kant
Judgement Date : 28 August, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:30526
RSA No. 1569 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1569 OF 2021 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SAKAMMA
(SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS)
1. SRI MALLESHA
S/O. LATE BORAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
2. SRI MAHADEVA
S/O. LATE BORAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
3. SRI MAHESHA
S/O. LATE BORAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T 4. SRI MANJU
Location: HIGH S/O. LATE BORAIAH,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
5. SRI KRISHNA
S/O. LATE BORAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
6. SMT. PARVATHAMMA
W/O. MAHADEVU,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
7. SMT. NEELAMMA
W/O. MUTHURAJU,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:30526
RSA No. 1569 of 2021
ALL THE APPELLANTS NO.1 TO 7 ARE
R/O. BASAVANAPURA VILLAGE
(HELAVARA HUNDI)
MAADAGALLI YELLE
BELAKAVADI POST,
YELAWALA HOBLI,
MYSURU TALUK-571 130.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SWAMY M.M., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
AND:
1. SRI B. LAKSHMAN
S/O. SHIVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
R/AT D.NO.235, EWS,
J.T. EXSTENTION,
KUVEMPUNAGAR
MYSURU-570 023.
...RESPONDENT
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.11.2020 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.119/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.12.2018
PASSED IN O.S.NO.900/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE IV
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MYSURU.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This Court, vide order dated 11.08.2023 observed that
this matter is of the year 2021 and the matter is listed third
time for non-compliance of office objections. However, in the
ends of justice, granted one more opportunity to the learned
NC: 2023:KHC:30526 RSA No. 1569 of 2021
counsel for the appellants to comply with the office objections
on cost of Rs.500/- payable at Registry and also made it clear
that, if the cost is not paid and the office objections are not
complied, list the matter for dismissal on the next date of
hearing. Inspite of the said order, the learned counsel for the
appellants has neither paid the cost nor complied with the office
objections.
2. Today, there is no representation on behalf of the
appellants. Hence, in view of the order dated 11.08.2023, the
appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections and
non-payment of cost.
Sd/-
JUDGE
ST
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!