Karnataka High Court
Sri. Seetharama Manja S/O Manjaiah ... vs Sri. K R Ananthapadmanabha Udupa @ A P ... on 3 June, 2024
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:18922
RSA No. 630 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.630 OF 2011(MON)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SEETHARAMA MANJA
S/O MANJAIAH MANJA
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O YEBBAGODU
BRAHMANAVADA VILLAGE,
NAGARA HOBLI,
HOSANAGARA TALUK,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT -577418
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SEETHARAMA MANJU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. K R ANANTHAPADMANABHA
UDUPA @ A P UDUPA
Digitally
signed by S/O K A RANGAPPA UDUPA
MALATESH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
KC
Location:
HIGH 2. SRI K R SRINATHA UDUPA
COURT OF SON OF K.A.RANGAPPA UDUPA
KARNATAKA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
BOTH ARE AGRICULTURISTS AND
AND RESIDENTS OF
R/O KARGADI VILLAGE
HANIYA POST, HOSANAGAR TALUK,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 418
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:18922
RSA No. 630 of 2011
3. M/S SAMRAT ADIKE MANDI
NO.2, APMC YARD, SAGAR,
REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
SRI. H M RAVIKUMAR
S/O MALLAPPA GOWDA
4. SRI. H M RAVIKUMAR
S/O MALLAPPA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
PARTNER,
M/S SAMRAT ADIKE MANDI
APMC YARD, SAGAR -577 401
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
5. SRI. M K CHIDANANDA
S/O KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/O KIBBACHALU
SAGAR TALUK-577 401
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
6. SMT. A L SULOCHANA
W/O LATE A V LAXMINARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/O AMACHI, SORAB TALUK -577 429,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
7. SRI. G BALACHANDRA
S/O G MURIGEPPA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/O GORAGODU VILLAGE,
HOSANAGARA TALUK,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577418
8. SRI. CHIDAMBARA BHATTA
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:18922
RSA No. 630 of 2011
S/O MAHABALA BHATTA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
R/O UDUCHE, HOSANAGARA TALUK,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT- 577418
9. SRI PADARAMAIAH HEGDE
S/O RAMAIAH HEGDE
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/O KORALAKAI,
SIDDAPURA TALUK-577 432,
NORTH CANARA DIST.
10. SRI. G H DATTATREYA
S/O G S HARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/O GADIKATTE,
SAGAR TALUK -577 418
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
11. T S VEERAPPAIAH
S/O SIDHAVEERAPPA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/O BILLEKAL SAGAR TALUK
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577418
12. SRI. T N SHEKARAPPA GOWDA
S/O S T NAGAPPA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/O TALANERI, HOSANAGARA TALUK,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577418
13. SRI. B J SATEESH
S/O SRIPADA RAO
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/O KEREKOPPA,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:18922
RSA No. 630 of 2011
NISARANI POST, ULAVI HOBLI,
SORAB TALUK-577 429
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
14. SRI. B J RAVINDRA
S/O RAMACHANDRA RAO
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/O KEREKOPPA,
NISARANI POST, ULAVI HOBLI,
SORAB TALUK-577 429
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
15. SMT. MALATHI K MURTHY
W/O KRISHNA MURTHY
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/O PADAVAGODU
SUBHASH NAGAR,
SAGAR TALUK-577 401
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
16. SRI. SRINIVASA UDUPA
S/O LATE K A RANGAPPA UDUPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O KARGADI, HANIYA POST,
HOSANAGARA TALUK-577 418
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
17. SRI. H S NANJUNDAPPA
S/O SHANKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/O HILAKUNJI,
HOSANAGARA TALUK -577418
SHIMOGA DISTRICT
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:18922
RSA No. 630 of 2011
18. SRI. A L VENKATESH
S/O LATE A LAXMINARAYA RAO
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/O AMACHI VILLAGE,
SORAB TALUK-577 429.
19. H.S.SHANKARAPPA
S/O NANJUNDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
OCC : AGRICULTURIST
R/O HILAKUNJI
HOSANAGARA TALUK - 577 418
SHIMOGA DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI G BALAKRISHNASHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R16;
VIDE ORDER DATED 29.03.2016, NOTICE TO R5, R6, R8, R9,
R13 AND R15 ARE DISPENSED WITH;
R10, R12, R14, R17, R18 ARE SERVED;
VIDE ORDER DATED 04.04.2019 APPEAL AGAINST R2 AND R19
IS DISMISSED AS ABATED)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE CODE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 30.06.2010 PASSED IN R.A.NO.36/2008 ON THE FILE
OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, SHIMOGA, ALLOWING THE
APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 17.01.2008 PASSED IN O.S.NO.118/2001 ON THE FILE
OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) & J.M.F.C., SAGAR.
THIS RSA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:18922
RSA No. 630 of 2011
ORDER
Case called twice.
None present for the appellant. Appellant absent.
Earlier, appellant was represented by Sri S.V.Prakash,
advocate. Later on, based on the memo of retirement filed by
Sri S.V.Prakash, Court notice was ordered and same was duly
served on the appellant-Seetharama Manja. He failed to
appear before the Court and do the needful for issue of notice
as ordered by this Court dated 04.04.2019.
Accordingly, with no alternative, appeal is dismissed for
non prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
kcm
