Sri Rama Apparao Dalavi vs Sri Ravalappa Kallappa Machak
2023 Latest Caselaw 2624 Kant

                                               -1-
                                                          RSA No. 5278 of 2008




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

                           DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

                                            BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
                          REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 5278 OF 2008



                   BETWEEN:

                       SRI. RAMA APPARAO DALAVI
                       AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                       R/O MURKWAD VILLAGE,
                       HALIYAL TQ, U.K. DISTRICT.

                                                                   ...APPELLANT

                   (BY SRI. RAMA APPARAO DALAVI, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                       SRI. RAVALAPPA KALLAPPA MACHAK
                       AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                       R/O MURKWAD VILLAGE,
SUJATA
SUBHASH                HALIYAL TQ, U.K.DISTRICT.
PAMMAR
Digitally signed                                                 ...RESPONDENT
by SUJATA
SUBHASH
PAMMAR             (BY SRI. VISHWANATH HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

                         THIS RSA FILED U/S 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
                   AND DECREE DATED 22.8.2008 PASSED IN R.A.NO.93/06 ON THE
                   FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), YELLAPUR, PARTLY ALLOWING
                   THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
                   25.1.1995 PASSED IN O.S.NO.23/93 N THE FILE OF THE COURT OF
                   THE MUSIFF, HALIYAL

                        THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
                   COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                             -2-
                                      RSA No. 5278 of 2008




                          ORDER

The notice to the appellant is duly served.

The appellant called out. Absent.

The learned counsel for the appellant on 23.03.2023

itself has filed retirement memo along with the copy of the

legal notice served on the appellant. Even then, appellant

did not represent and Court was kind enough to issue

Court notice to the appellant. In spite of service of Court

notice, the appellant did not respond. It appears that

appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

Hence, appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SSP