Varalakshmamma vs Rajanna
2024 Latest Caselaw 750 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Varalakshmamma vs Rajanna on 9 January, 2024

Author: M.G.S. Kamal

Bench: M.G.S. Kamal

                                            -1-
                                                          NC: 2024:KHC:1054
                                                       RSA No. 1199 of 2020




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                         DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

                                         BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
                      REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1199 OF 2020 (PAR)
                 BETWEEN:

                 VARALAKSHMAMMA,
                 W/O G.L. NAGARAJU,
                 AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
                 R/O GANADAHUNASE,
                 BUKKAPATNA, SIRA TALUK,
                 PIN CODE- 572 137.
                                                               ...APPELLANT
                 (BY SRI. SATISH R. GIRJI, ADVOCATE)

                 AND:

                 1.      RAJANNA,
                         AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

Digitally        2.      SHIVANNA,
signed by                AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
SUMA B N
Location: High   3.      KARIYANNA,
Court of
Karnataka                AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
                         DEAD BY LRS.,

                 3(A). NIRMALA,
                       W/O LATE KARIYANNA,
                       AGED ABOUIT 43 YEARS,

                 3(B). RAMESHA,
                       S/O LATE KARIYANNA,
                       AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
                               -2-
                                       NC: 2024:KHC:1054
                                    RSA No. 1199 of 2020




3(C). RAMYA,
      D/O LATE KARIYANNA,
      AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,

      3(A) TO (C) ARE R/O
      NERALAGUNDDA,
      BUKKAPATNA HOBLI,
      SIRA TALUK - 572 137.

3(D). RAGHAVENDRA,
      S/O LATE KARIYANNA,
      AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
      BUKKAPATNA HOBLI,
      SIRA TALUK - 572 137.

4.    SEETHARAMU,
      AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

5.    V. KRISHNAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

6.    THIPPESWAMI,
      AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

7.    CHANDRAKALA,
      AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,

8.    RAMAKKA,
      W/O VEERANAIKA,
      AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS,

      RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 ARE
      CHILDREN OF RAMAKRISHNAPPA
      AND SHIVAMMA.
      RESPONDENTS NO.5 AND 6 ARE
                           -3-
                                    NC: 2024:KHC:1054
                                 RSA No. 1199 of 2020




      CHILDREN OF VEERANAIKA AND RAMAKKA,
      RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8 ARE
      R/O GANADAHUNASE VILLAGE,
      BUKKAPATNA HOBLI,
      SIRA TALUK - 572 137.

9.    H.P. VEERANARAYANA,
      S/O H.P. PUTTANAIKA,
      AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
      R/O KARIYALA VILAGE,
      JOGAGONDANAHALLI HOBLI,
      HIRIYUR TALUK - 572 143.

10.   SUMITHRAMMA,
      W/O HANUMANTHAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
      R/O SANTHEPETE,
      SIRA TOWN - 572 137.

11.   LATHAMMA,
      W/O MALLAIAH,
      AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
      R/O HEMDALA VILLAGE,
      HIRIYUR TALUK - 572 143.

12.   RAGHAVENDRA,
      AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

13.   RAMESH,
      AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,

14.   RAMYA
      AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,

15.   ERAMMA,
      W/O CHANDRASHEKAR,
      AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
                            -4-
                                         NC: 2024:KHC:1054
                                     RSA No. 1199 of 2020




      RESPONDENTS 10 TO 15 ARE
      CHILDREN OF KARIYANNA,
      R/O GANADAHUNASE,
      BUKKAPATNA , SIRA TALUK - 572 137.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS
     THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.11.2019
PASSED IN RA.No.129/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, TUMAKURU, DISMISSING THE
APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 12.03.2019 PASSED IN OS.No.82/2014 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIRA.

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

Sri Sathish R Girji, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant submits that the sole appellant has passed away

during the Covid-19 period and he has no instructions in

the matter.

2. In view of the above, the appeal stands abated.

Sd/-

JUDGE NMS CT: BHK