Karnataka High Court
Smt. Sampangiyamma vs Sri. Muninarayanappa on 9 March, 2023
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
RSA No. 727 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.727 OF 2022 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT SAMPANGIYAMMA
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
D/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA
R/AT DODDAKURUBARAHALLI VILLGE
CHANARAYAPATNA HOLBI
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562110
2. SRI SAMPANGIRAMAIAH
Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
by SHARANYA T S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
3. SRI M RAJANNA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA
4. SRI M SRINIVAS
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA
APPELLANTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE
R/AT ARSANAHALLI VILLAGE
-2-
RSA No. 727 of 2022
NANDI HOBLI
CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK & DIST.-562101
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR D M, ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
AND:
SRI. MUNINARAYANAPPA
S/O LATE APPAIAH @ APPAYANNA
AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS
R/AT ARASANAHALLI VILLAGE
NANDI HOBLI
CHIKKABLLAPURA TALUK & DIST. -562101
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SUBRAMANYA P, ADVOCATE FOR C/R;
SRI V SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR
GPA HOLDER OF RESPONDENT)
THIS R.S.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.02.2022
PASSED IN R.A.NO.75/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
CHIKKABALLAPURA AND ETC.
THIS R.S.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
RSA No. 727 of 2022
ORDER
This appeal was filed in the year 2022. When the
matter was listed on 12.05.2022, there was no
representation however, two weeks' time was granted to
comply with the office objections. On 24.08.2022, at the
request of the counsel for the appellants, the matter was
adjourned. On 13.10.2022, the counsel for the respondent
sought time. On 14.11.2022 and 09.01.2023, at the
request of the counsel for the appellants, the matter was
adjourned. On 16.01.2023, the proxy counsel sought time
on behalf of the counsel for the respondent on the ground
that his colleague wife passed away and on 01.02.2023,
the junior counsel sought time on the ground of ill-health
of the mother of the senior counsel. On 16.02.2023, there
was no representation on behalf of the appellants
however, one more opportunity was given to the counsel
for the appellants to proceed with the matter and also
made it clear that if the counsel for the appellants does
RSA No. 727 of 2022
not appear on the next date of hearing, the appeal will be
dismissed for non-prosecution.
2. On 23.02.2023, the junior counsel sought time
on the ground of ill-health of the mother of the counsel for
the appellants and also observed that on 01.02.2023 also
the very same submission was made. Even though there
was a peremptory order, one more opportunity was given
since the time was sought on the ground of ill-health of
the mother of counsel for the appellants. But today, there
is no representation on behalf of the appellants. Hence, it
is clear that even though sufficient opportunity was given,
the counsel for the appellants is not interested in pursuing
the matter diligently. Thus, I do not find any grounds to
adjourn the matter once again. Accordingly, the appeal is
dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
