Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 6028 Kant
Judgement Date : 29 August, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:30723
RSA No. 1290 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1290 OF 2021 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI M. VENKATESHAPPA
S/O. MUNISHAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT BALENAHALLI VILLAGE
SULIBELE HOBLI,
HOSAKOTE TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MURTHY K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI MUNITHOOTLAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T 1. SRI H.M. BEERAPPA
Location: HIGH S/O. LATE MUNITHOTLAPPA
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
KARNATAKA
R/AT HOSAPETE VILLAGE
JANAGAMAKOTE HOBLI
SIDLAGHATTA TALUK
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.
2. SRI THOTLAPPA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
S/O. RAMANNA
R/AT ATTIBELE VILLAGE
SULIBELE HOBLI
HOSAKOTE TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:30723
RSA No. 1290 of 2021
SRI CHANNAVEERADEVARAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
3. SHIVANANDA
MAJOR,
4. SHIVAKUMAR
MAJOR,
5. SHIVASHANKAR
MAJOR,
6. UDAYASHANKAR
MAJOR,
7. PRAKASH
MAJOR,
8. PURRABASAVAMMA
MAJOR,
RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 7 ARE THE
CHILDREN AND 8 IS THE WIFE OF
CHANNAVEERADEVARAPPA
ALL ARE R/AT SIDDAWARA NILAYA
NO.12/1, 4TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN,
CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE-560 018.
9. SRI GUDIYAPPA
MAJOR,
R/AT HOSAPETE VILLAGE
JANGAMAKOTE HOBLI
SIDLAGHATTA TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA.
10. SMT. JAYAMMA
W/O. MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
R/AT SUBBRAYANAPETE VILLAGE
KAIWARA HOBLI
CHINTAMANI TALUK.
...RESPONDENTS
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:30723
RSA No. 1290 of 2021
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.01.2020
PASSED IN R.A.3/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA,
SITTING AT CHINTAMANI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.11.2014
PASSED ON I.A.NO.3 IN FDP 3/1997 ON THE FILE OF THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIDLAGHATTA, ALLOWING
THE I.A.NO.3 FILED U/S 54, ORDER 20, RULE 18 R/W. SEC.
151 OF CPC AND ALSO DISMISSED THE PETITION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the appellant though sought a week's
time for compliance of office objections on 21.08.2023, till
date, he has not complied with the same and also not paid the
cost. The order dated 21.08.2023 is clear that, if the cost is
not paid and the office objections are not complied, list the
matter for dismissal. Inspite of the same, learned counsel for
the appellant has not complied with the office objections and
also not paid the cost.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-payment of cost
and non-compliance of office objections.
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!