Karnataka High Court
Smt.Kasturevva W/O. Basappa ... vs Shri.Narayan S/O. Mahadevappa ... on 13 March, 2023
Bench: Anant Ramanath Hegde
-1-
RFA No. 100385 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100385 OF 2018 (DEC/PAR-)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. KASTUREVVA W/O. BASAPPA KUNKUR
AGE:66 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. HULKOPPA, TQ:KALAGHATAGI,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580118.
2. SMT. LALITA W/O. VISHWANATH KARADE
AGE:64 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. ITIGATTI, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580114.
3. MUKUND S/O. SHANKARAPPA GAIKWAD
AGE:64 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. ITIGATTI, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580114.
4. SM. SHARADA W/O. GURUNATH BHOSALE
AGE:62 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
Digitally
SAROJA
signed by
SAROJA
HANGARAKI
R/O. NAVALUR, TQ:DHARWAD,
HANGARAKI Date:
2023.03.15
11:05:25 -
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580114.
0700
5. KRISHNAPPA S/O. SHANKARAPPA GAIKWAD,
AGE:46 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. ITIGATTI, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD. PINCODE: 580114.
6. MARUTI S/O. SHANKARAPPA GAIKWAD,
AGE:41 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. ITIGATTI, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580114.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SATISH S. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE)
-2-
RFA No. 100385 of 2018
AND:
1. SHRI. NARAYAN, S/O. MAHADEVAPPA GAIKWAD,
AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. ITIGATTI, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD. PINCODE: 580114.
2. SMT. BAYAKKA, W/O. MAHADEVAPPA KOTI,
AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. YEMMETTI, TQ:KALAGHATAGI,
DIST:DHARWAD. PINCODE: 580118.
3. RAMCHANDRA, S/O. VISHNU GAIKWAD,
AGE:60 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. ITIGATTI, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580114.
4. NAKUL, S/O. VISHNU GAIKWAD,
AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. ITIGATTI, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580114.
5. SMT. SUMITRA, W/O. MALLESHI RANGOJI,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. HULKOPPA, TQ: KALAGHATAGI,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580118.
6. SMT. NEELAVVA, W/O. MAHADEV DESAI,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. ITIGATTI, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 580114.
7. SMT. CHANDRAVVA, W/O. BASU RAMANAKOPPA,
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. CHAVARGUDDA, TQ: KALAGHATAGI,
DIST:DHRAWAD, PINCODE: 580024.
8. SMT. TULASAVVA, W/O. BALAPPA PAWAR,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. MALASUR, TQ:DHARWAD,
DIST:DHARWAD, PINCODE: 581204.
9. SMT. RATNAVVA, W/O. SHIVAJI KADAM,
AGE:54 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. KALAGHATAGI, TQ:KALAGHATAGI,
DIST:DHARWAD,
-3-
RFA No. 100385 of 2018
PINCODE: 581204.
10. SRI. SHANKRANNA URF. SHANKARAPPA,
S/O. ISHWARAPPA MUNAVALL,
AGE:67 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SIDDALING KRIPA,
DESHPANDE NAGAR,
HUBLI, DIST:DHARWAD,
PINCODE: 587101.
11. MANJUNATH S/O. SHANKARANNA MUNAVALLI,
AGE:43 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SIDDALING KRIPA,
DESHPANDE NAGAR,
HUBLI, DIST:DHARWAD,
PINCODE: 587101.
12. RAJU URF. RAJSHEKHAR,
S/O. SHANKARANNA, MUNAVALLI,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SIDDALING KRIPA,
DESHPANDE NAGAR,
HUBLI, DIST:DHARWAD,
PINCODE: 587101.
13. MICROFINISH VALVES PVT. LTD.,
A COMPANY AT B-161,162,
INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, GOKUL ROAD,
HUBLI, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
TILAK.K.VIKAMSHI, S/O. KARAMCHAND,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. B 161,162, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,
GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI,
DIST:DAHRWAD, PINCODE: 587101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M C HUKKERI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R11)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.07.2018 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.180/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DHARWAD, PARTLY
DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR DECLARATION AND PARTITION
AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.
-4-
RFA No. 100385 of 2018
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In the appeal memo the appellants have averred that
the value of the plaintiffs' share is Rs.40,00,000/- and
total value of the properties is Rs.1,20,00,000/-. Under
the circumstance, the appeal does not lie before this
Bench and it lies before the Division Bench.
2. Despite the time granted to the appellants to
remove the office objections, the same are not removed.
There is no representation on behalf of the appellants.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SH
