Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5018 Kant
Judgement Date : 28 July, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:26666
MSA No. 55 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 55 OF 2020 (LA)
BETWEEN:
THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE
MARKET COMMITTEE
BATAWADI, TUMKURU-572103
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
APMC, BATAWADI
TUMKURU-572103
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. T. SWAROOP, ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
AND:
RAMAKRISHNA SHETTY
DEAD BY LRS
Digitally signed 1. D.NAGARATHANAMMA
by SHARANYA T DEAD OTHER CLAIMANTS ARE THE LRS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 2. D.R. ASHWATHNARAYANASHETTY
KARNATAKA
S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/O. KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN
BANGALORE-560060
3. D.R. THIPPAIAH
DEAD BY LRS
3(a) SMT. D.T. MANOHARA
W/O LATE THIPPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:26666
MSA No. 55 of 2020
3(b) D.T. VENKATESH
S/O LATE THIPPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
3(c) D.T. MANJESHWAR
S/O LATE THIPPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDING AT 'RAMA PRIYA'
C.S.I. LAYOUT, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR
TUMKUR-572 101.
4. D.R.RAJU
S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/O. #.13, BRINDAVANA ENTERPRISES
MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 026.
5. D.R.RAGHAVENDRA GUPTA
S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
R/O K.R. EXTENSION
TUMKUR-572201.
6. D.R. SUBBARAJU
S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/O # 13, BRIDHAVANA ENTERPRISES
MYSORE ROAD,
BANGALORE-560026.
7. SMT. S.N. MEENAKSHAMMA
W/O LATE S.L. NARASAPPA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/O CHIKKATHAPUR VILLAGE
SANDUR POST
BELLARY DISTRICT-583119.
8. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
TUMKUR-572102
...RESPONDENTS
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:26666
MSA No. 55 of 2020
THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 105 of CPC R/W
54(2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.03.2017 PASSED IN RA
No.144/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL.DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, AT TUMAKURU AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The counsel for the appellant is absent. This matter
is listed for non-compliance of office objections for fifth
time. This appeal is filed in the year 2020 but till date, the
counsel for the appellant has not complied with the office
objections. Thus, it is clear that the counsel for the
appellant is not interested in pursuing the matter
diligently. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-
compliance of office objections.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
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!