Sri R Jayakumar vs Sri B R Narayanappa
2024 Latest Caselaw 4525 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Sri R Jayakumar vs Sri B R Narayanappa on 14 February, 2024

                                              -1-
                                                          NC: 2024:KHC:6320
                                                        RFA No. 230 of 2009




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

                                            BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI
                         REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 230 OF 2009 (PAR)

                   BETWEEN:

                   SRI. R.JAYAKUMAR,
                   S/O LATE B.S.RAMACHANDRAIH,
                   AGE:50 YEARS,
                   R/O NO.199-12/1,
                   VENKATAPPA GARDEN,
                   7TH BLOCK WEST, JAYANAGAR,
                   BANGALORE - 560 002.

                                                               ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. R. JAYAKUMAR, PARTY IN PERSON (ABSENT) )
                   AND:

                   1.    SRI.B.R.NARAYANAPPA,
                         S/O LATE.B.S.RAMACHANDRAIAH,
Digitally signed         AGE: 68 YEARS,
by                       R/O NO.424, 13TH CROSS,
ANNAPURNA G              'G' BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNAGAR,
Location: High           MYSORE-22.
Court of
Karnataka
                         HIS LEGAL HEIRS

                         1.(a) SMT.R.PREMAVATHI,
                         W/O LATE B.R.NARAYANAPPA,
                         AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,

                         1.(b) SMT.N.JAYALAKSHMI,
                         W/O.H.N.V.SUBBU,
                         D/O.LATE B.R.NARAYANAPPA,
                         AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.
                            -2-
                                        NC: 2024:KHC:6320
                                      RFA No. 230 of 2009




     1.(c) SMT.N.SWARNAMBA,
     W/O H.R.SHAMASUNDARA,
     D/O.LATE B.R.NARAYANAPPA,
     AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.

     ALL ARE R/AT:
     NO.424, 13TH CROSS, "G" BLOCK,
     RAMAKRISHNANAGARA, MYSORE-28.

2.   SMT.RUKMINIYAMMA,
     W/O LATE B.S.VENAKATA RAO,
     AGE 73 YEARS,

3.   SRI.V.VIJAYKUMAR,
     S/O LATE B.S.VENKATA RAO,
     AGE: 55 YEARS,

4.   SRI.V.SATYAPRAKASH,
     S/O LATE B.S.VENKATA RAO,
     AGE: 50 YEARS,

     RESPONDENT NOS. 2 TO 4 ARE RESIDENTS OF
     NO.199-12, 2ND CROSS,
     W.K.P. ROAD, VENKATAPPA GARDEN,
     7TH BLOCK WEST, JAYANAGAR,
     BANGALORE-560 002.

5.   SMT. SUSHEELAMMA,
     W/O LATE H.S.RAGAHVENDRA RAO,
     D/O LATE B.S.RAMACHANDRAIAH,
     AGE: 75 YEARS,
     R/AT NO.233, SHANUBHOG'S COMPOUND,
     RAMAMANDIR ROAD,
     HEBBAL, BANGALORE.

6.   SMT. SHYAMALA
     AGE: 37 YEARS

7.   SMT. RADHAMANI,
     AGE: 35 YEARS,
                             -3-
                                          NC: 2024:KHC:6320
                                        RFA No. 230 of 2009




8.   SRI.SHIVASHANKAR,
     AGE: 33 YEARS

     RESPONDENTS 6 TO 8 ARE CHILDREN OF
     LATE YASHODAMMA AND LATE
     G.S.KRISHNAMURTHY,
     R/AT GOLAHALLI,
     NELAMANGALA TALUK,
     BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. D.R. RAJASHEKHARAPPA., ADVOCATE
FOR C/R1 AND R1 (A TO C) (ABSENT);
VIDE ORDER DATED 13.04.2016, R2 DECEASED,
R3 AND R4 ARE LR's OF R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 12.01.2017, APPEAL AGAINST R3, R4 AND
R6 TO R8 IS DISMISSED;
R5 IS SERVED.)

     THIS RFA IS FILED U/S 96 R/W O 41 CPC AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED: 11.11.2008 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.3883/2004 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXVIII ADDL.CITY
CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR
PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

None appears for the appellant.

2. The appellant was appearing in person earlier.

The order dated 04.01.2017 passed by this Court shows

that the learned counsel, who was appearing for the

appellant was permitted to retire.

NC: 2024:KHC:6320

3. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 12.01.2017,

none had appeared for the appellant. Therefore, it

appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting

the appeal.

4. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non

prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

PTM