Mahadu S/O Beerappa Pujari And Ors vs Ram S/O Shankar And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 11906 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Mahadu S/O Beerappa Pujari And Ors vs Ram S/O Shankar And Ors on 29 May, 2024

                                             -1-
                                                    NC: 2024:KHC-K:3371
                                                       RSA No. 7042 of 2013




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                            DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2024

                                           BEFORE

                           THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA

                        REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 7042 OF 2013 (INJ)

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   MAHADU S/O BEERAPPA PUJARI
                        AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
                        DIST. BIDAR-585401.

                   2.   DADARAO S/O SAIBANNA PUJARI
                        AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
                        DIST. BIDAR-585401.

                   3.   RAVAN S/O DASHARATH JADHAVA
                        AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
                        DIST. BIDAR-585401.
Digitally signed
by SWETA
KULKARNI           4.   SRAVAN S/O DASHARATH JADHAVA
Location: High          AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
Court of                R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
Karnataka
                        DIST. BIDAR-585401.

                   5.   BHAVARAO S/O TUKARAM PUJARI
                        AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
                        DIST. BIDAR-585401.

                   6.   BHIMRAO @ BHEEMRAO
                        S/O VISHWANTH PATIL
                        AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE,
                            -2-
                                 NC: 2024:KHC-K:3371
                                    RSA No. 7042 of 2013




     TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
     DIST. BIDAR-585401.

                                           ...APPELLANTS
(A1, A3 TO A6 ARE-ABSENT;
 A2-ABATED V/O DATED 29.05.2024)

AND:

1.   RAM S/O SHANKAR
     AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
     DIST. BIDAR-585401.

2.   LAXMAN S/O SHANKAR
     AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
     DIST. BIDAR-585401.

3.   BHARAT S/O SHANKAR
     AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
     DIST. BIDAR-585401.

4.   SHATRUGHAN S/O SHANKAR
     AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: EKAMBA VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
     DIST. BIDAR-585401.


                                         ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SUBHASH MALLAPUR, AND SRI. K. RAVINDRA, ADVS.)

     THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THE SECOND APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 18.04.2012 PASSED IN O.S. NO.82/2011
BY CIVIL JUDGE BASAVAKALYAN AND WHICH IS CONFIRMED
IN R.A. NO.16/2012 VIDE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
09.11.2012 BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BASAVAKALYAN AND
REMAND THE MATTER TO THE TRIAL COURT TO GIVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO THE DEFENDANTS TO FILE A WRITTEN
                                  -3-
                                       NC: 2024:KHC-K:3371
                                           RSA No. 7042 of 2013




STATEMENT AND DECIDE             THE   MATER    ON   MERITS   IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

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

                            JUDGMENT

This Court issued Court notice to the appellants on

29.03.2023. As per the bailiff report dated 05.05.2023, the

Court notices issued have been duly served on appellant Nos.1,

3 to 6. The bailiff report further states that appellant No.2 is

reported to be dead. Appeal abates as against appellant No.2.

The appeal is of the year 2013. From May, 2023 there is

no representation on behalf of the appellants 1, 3 to 6. It

appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting

the appeal. This Court has no other option than to dismiss the

appeal for non-prosecution.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SWK

CT: VD