Smt Savitha R Shetty vs Smt Meenakshi (Since Deceased) K ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 27525 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Smt Savitha R Shetty vs Smt Meenakshi (Since Deceased) K ... on 15 November, 2024

Author: Ravi V Hosmani

Bench: Ravi V Hosmani

                                                   -1-
                                                              NC: 2024:KHC:46517
                                                            RSA No. 1637 of 2015




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

                                                 BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
                           REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1637 OF 2015 (SP)
                      BETWEEN:

                      1.    SMT.SAVITHA R.SHETTY,
                            AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
                            PROP:- DEVI BUILDERS,
                            1st FLOOR, R.NO.8, MEDIFAIR COMPLEX,
                            KARANGLAPADY, MANGALORE - 03.
                                                                  ...APPELLANT
                      (BY SRI NIRANJAN N.Y. AND UMESH P.H., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

                      AND:

                            SMT.MEENAKSHI (SINCE DECEASED)

                      1.    K. CHANDRAPRAKASH SHETTY,
                            AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
                            S/O GOPALA SHETTY,
                            BOTH ARE HINDUS AND BUNTS AND
                            LAND-HOLDERS AND ARE
Digitally signed by         R/A "GOPALA NIVAS" KINNIMULKY,
ANUSHA V
                            POST: UDUPI - 576101, D.K.
Location: High
Court Of Karnataka
                      2.    T. SUDHAKAR RAI,
                            AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
                            S/O T.RAMESH PAI,
                            #5, CHITRAKALA, ANANTHA NAGAR,
                            MANIPAL, POST: MANIPAL,
                            UDUPI TQ. D.K. - 576119.

                            ANIL SHETTY (SINCE DECEASED)

                      3.    SMT. KRIPA SHETTY,
                            AGED 59 YEARS,
                            W/O ANIL SHETTY.
                              -2-
                                        NC: 2024:KHC:46517
                                      RSA No. 1637 of 2015




4.   KEERTHI SHETTY,
     AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
     D/O ANIL SHETTY.

5.   DHURVA SHETTY,
     S/O LATE ANIL SHETTY,
     AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS.

6.   AJITH SHETTY,
     S/O LATE MEENAKSHI @ RAMA BAI AGED,
     ABOUT 59 YEARS.

7.   RAJASHEKARA SHETTY,
     S/O LATE MEENAKSHI @ RAMA BAI,
     AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.

8.   ASHA SHETTY,
     AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
     D/O LATE MEENAKSHI @ RAMA BAI .


9.   JYOTHI SHETTY,
     D/O LATE MEENAKSHI @ RAMA BAI.

10. LATHA SHETTY,
    D/O LATE MEENAKSHI @ RAMA BAI,
    AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS .

     NOS.3 TO 10 ARE RESIDING AT "GOPAL NIVAS"
     KINNI MULKY, UDUPI TOWN, MAIN ROAD, UDUPI -
     576101.
                                         ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI PRABHAKARA K.L., ADVOCATE FOR R1 (ABSENT)
    SRI A.AMBARISHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (ABSENT)
    VIDE ORDER DATED 27.09.2023, NOTICE TO R3 TP R10 IS
    DISPENSED WITH)

     THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 31.07.2015 PASSED IN R.A.NO.52/2011
ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, UDUPI
                                   -3-
                                                    NC: 2024:KHC:46517
                                              RSA No. 1637 of 2015




ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 30.08.2011 PASSED IN O.S.NO.137/1995
ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN)
UDUPI.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:      HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI


                           ORAL JUDGMENT

Matter was passed over and called again. There is no

representation.

2. Even on previous occasion, there was no

representation. This would indicate that appellant is not

diligent in pursuing the appeal. Accordingly, appeal is

dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

(RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE

CPN