Karnataka High Court
Sri Prakash S/O Channappa Jangale vs Sri Shivaji S/O Tammanna Chougale on 3 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7296
RSA No. 5341 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 5341 OF 2008 (SP-)
BETWEEN:
SRI PRAKASH S/O CHANNAPPA JANGALE
SINCE DEAD BY LRS
1. SMT. DEEPA W/O PRAKASH JANGALE
AGED: 48 YEARS,
2. SRI PRASAD S/O PRAKASH JANGALE
AGE: 24 YEARS
3. NAMRATA D/O PRAKASH JANGALE
AGE: 26 YEARS
4. NANDA D/O PRAKASH JANGALE
AGE: 28 YEARS
5. SRI. GAJANAN S/O CHANNAPPA JANGALE
AGE: 56 YEARS
Digitally signed
by SAROJA
HANGARAKI 6. SRI. SATISH S/O CHANNAPPA JANGALE
Location: HIGH AGE: 53 YEARS,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD ALL ARE R/O. CTS NO.2420,
BENCH KACHERI GALLI, SHAHAPUR-BELAGAVI.
DHARWAD
TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI-590001.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI G.B.SHASTRY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI SHIVAJI S/O TAMMANNA CHOUGULE
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O 225/2, GOODS SHED ROAD,
BELAGAVI-590001.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7296
RSA No. 5341 of 2008
2. SRI MARUTI S/O TAMMANNA CHOUGULE
AGE: 50 YEARS
R/O 225/2, GOODS SHED ROAD,
BELAGAVI-590001.
3. SRI RAMA S/O TAMMANNA CHOUGULE
AGE: 48 YEARS
R/O 225/2, GOODS SHED ROAD,
BELAGAVI-590001.
4. SRI ISHWAR S/O CHIDAMBAR DIXIT
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O VIDYA NAGAR, ANAGOL,
BELAGAVI-590001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI D. RAVIKUMAR GOKAKAKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3
V/O DATED 1/10/2013, APPEAL AGAINST R4 IS ABATED)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.08.2008 IN R.A.NO.5/2006
ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, AT BELAGAVI,
R.A.NO.5/2006 BE DISMISSED AND JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE
I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION) AT BELAGAVI IN
O.S.NO.121/1997 DATED 19.11.2005 BE RESTORED AND SUIT BE
DECREED AS PRAYED FOR AND THIS APPEAL BE ALLOWED WITH
COSTS THROUGHOUT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellants is present.
Vide order dated 03.11.2023 it was noticed that,
respondent No.1 was deceased and the matter was
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7296
adjourned to bring the legal representatives of the deceased
respondent No.1 on record.
Vide order dated 17.11.2023 it was noticed that,
respondent Nos.2 and 3 are deceased and the matter was
adjourned to bring their legal representatives on record.
Till date, the legal representatives of the deceased
respondent Nos.1 to 3 have not been brought on record.
In view of the aforementioned, the above appeal as
against respondent Nos.1 to 3 is dismissed as having abated.
It was noticed that, vide order dated 01.10.2013, the
above appeal as against respondent No.4 stands abated.
In view of the aforementioned the above appeal is
dismissed as having abated.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SVH
CT:GSM
