Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1630 Kant
Judgement Date : 28 February, 2023
-1-
RSA No. 1889 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1889 OF 2017 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. CHIKKATHAYAMMA
W/O. LATE GARELINGAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
2. SMT. PADMA M.L.
D/O. LATE GARELINGAIAH,
W/O. GANGADHAR C.
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
3. SMT. BABY M.L.
D/O. LATE GARELINGAIAH,
W/O. LATE SHIVAKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
4. SMT. SUGUNA M.L.
Digitally signed by
SHARANYA T D/O. LATE GARELINGAIAH,
Location: HIGH W/O. MAHADEV R.,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
APPELLANTS 1 TO 4 ARE
R/AT CHAMUNDESWARI NILAYA,
AHSOKNAGAR, MALAVALLI,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 430.
5. SMT. MAMATHA M.L.
D/O. LATE GARELINGAIAH,
W/O. C.J.CHALUVARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT CHALLANAYAKANAHALLI,
MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT.
-2-
RSA No. 1889 of 2017
6. SMT. PAVITHRA M.L.
D/O. LATE GARELINGAIAH,
W/O. RAMESH,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT SHIVANASAMUDRA (BLUFF)
MALAVALLI TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 430.
7. SMT. JYOTHI M.L.
D/O. LATE GARELINGAIAH,
W/O. VIJAYKUMAR R.
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
R/AT THADIKAVAGILU,
JALAMANGALA POST,
KOOTAKAL HOBLI,
RAMANGAR TALUK
AND DISTRICT-562 159.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. GANGI REDDY B.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. M. MUTHURAJU
S/O. MUTHAMMA, MAJOR,
R/AT A.J.COLONY,
AHSOKANAGARA,
MALAVALLI TOWN,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 430.
...RESPONDENT
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.12.2015 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.16/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC, MALAVALLI, REJECTING THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.1.2013
PASSED IN O.S.NO.350/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDL.
CIVIL JUDGE, MALAVALLI.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
RSA No. 1889 of 2017
JUDGMENT
This Court, vide order dated 22.08.2019, granted three
weeks time to comply with the office objections and while
granting time, it was also made clear that the appellants shall
comply with the office objections within a period of three weeks
from today and if the office objections are not complied within
such period, the appeal shall be listed for dismissal. However,
till date, the office objections are not complied with, even
though the order was passed on 22.08.2019.
Hence, in view of the peremptory order dated
22.08.2019, the appeal is dismissed for 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!