Gavisiddappa S/O Mudiyappa Divatar vs Smt. Laxmawwa W/O Gavisiddappa Hari
2024 Latest Caselaw 12257 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Gavisiddappa S/O Mudiyappa Divatar vs Smt. Laxmawwa W/O Gavisiddappa Hari on 3 June, 2024

Author: Mohammad Nawaz

Bench: Mohammad Nawaz

                                                     -1-
                                                            NC: 2024:KHC-D:7290-DB
                                                            RFA No. 100155 of 2022




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

                                  DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2024
                                                  PRESENT
                               THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
                                                    AND
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA


                           REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100155 OF 2022 (PAR/POS)


                      BETWEEN:

                      GAVISIDDAPPA
                      S/O. MUDIYAPPA DIVATAR,
                      AGE: 58 YEARS,
                      OCC: AGRI.,
                      R/O: GOURI ANGAL NEAR,
                      JOGI BANDI,
                      KOPPAL-583231.
                                                                       ...APPELLANT
                      (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKHAR R. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)


                      AND:

Digitally signed by   1.    SMT. LAXMAWWA
BHARATHI H M
Location: HIGH              W/O. GAVISIDDAPPA HARI
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                   AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRI.,
DHARWAD
BENCH
Date: 2024.06.10
                            R/O: GUNNALLI,
12:11:39 +0530
                            TQ: KOPPAL-583238.

                      2.    SMT. AKKAMMA
                            W/O. VEERESHAPPA KANKI
                            AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRI.,
                            R/O: KORI ONI,
                             SINDHANOOR,
                            DIST: RAICHUR-584128.

                      3.    SMT. MALLAMMA
                            W/O. SHIVANNA
                            AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRI.,
                            R/O: HOSPET,
                            DIST: BELLARY-583201.
                               -2-
                                        NC: 2024:KHC-D:7290-DB
                                        RFA No. 100155 of 2022




4.   GEETHA
     W/O. SHANKARAPPA HADIMANI
     AGE: 40 YEARS,
      OCC: AGRI.,
     R/O: KOPPAL-583231.

5.   HANUMANTHAPPA
     S/O. ESHAPPA DIVATAR
     AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRI.,
     R/O: KUKANOOR,
      TQ: YELBURGA,
     DIST: KOPPAL-583236.

6.   SHARANAPPA
     S/O. ESHAPPA DIVATAR
     AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRI.,
     R/O: KUKANOOR,
      TQ: YELBURGA,
     DIST: KOPPAL-583236.

7.   SHIVAPUTRAPPA
      S/O. MUDIYAPPA DIWATAR
     AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRI.,
     R/O: PRAGATI NAGAR,
      KINNAL ROAD,
     KOPPAL-583231.

8.   BALAWWA @ SHARADA
     W/O. TIRUKAPPA BRISTANNAVAR,
     AGE: 70 YEARS,
     OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: VIDYANAGAR, EAST 'C' BLOCK,
     HAVERI, TQ. AND
     DIST: HAVERI-581110.

                                                ...RESPONDENTS


      THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH SECTION
151 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
11.04.2012 PASSED IN O.S.NO.13/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT KOPPAL, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR
PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.


     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS               DAY,
T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                -3-
                                        NC: 2024:KHC-D:7290-DB
                                       RFA No. 100155 of 2022




                             ORDER

It is the 2nd defendant's appeal challenging the decree

passed in favour of the plaintiffs by the trial Court.

At the earlier point of time, by order dated 14.12.2022,

this appeal came to be dismissed for non-compliance of

office objections. Vide order dated 31.05.2023 passed on

I.As.1/2023 and 2/2023, the order of dismissal came to be

recalled and the appeal was restored. Thereafter, the matter

was posted for non-compliance of office objections. In spite

of sufficient time being granted, the appellant has not

complied the office objections. Hence, there are no grounds

to grant further time.

Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed for non-

prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

                                        JUDGE



Kmv     ct:vh