Vinayaka S/O Ganapati Honavar vs Mahadevi W/O Narayan Honavar
2025 Latest Caselaw 5675 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Vinayaka S/O Ganapati Honavar vs Mahadevi W/O Narayan Honavar on 28 March, 2025

                                                  -1-
                                                               NC: 2025:KHC-D:5771
                                                              RSA No. 5073 of 2013




                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                           DHARWAD BENCH
                                DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
                                                 BEFORE
                                 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
                             REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 5073 OF 2013 (INJ-)
                      BETWEEN:
                      1.   VINAYAKA S/O. GANAPATI HONAVAR,
                           AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,

                      2.   MANJUNATH S/O. GANAPATI HONAVAR,
                           AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,

                      3.   SUBBI @ MAHADEVI
                           W/O. GANAPATI HONAVAR,
                           AGE: 58 YEARS,
                           OCC: SERVICE & HOUSEHOLD WORK,

                           ALL ARE RESIDING AT BANK STREET, HONAVAR,
                           TQ: HONAVAR, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 334.

                           (APPELLANT NOS.1 TO 2 ARE LR'S DEFENDANT NO.1
                           AND APPELLANT NO.3 IS DEFENDANT NO.2 BEFORE
MOHANKUMAR
B SHELAR                   TRIAL COURT & APPELLANT NOS.1 TO 3 BEFORE 1ST
Digitally signed by
                           APPELLATE COURT RESPECTIVELY)
MOHANKUMAR B
SHELAR
Location: HIGH
                                                                      ...APPELLANTS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH         (SRI. VINAYAK-APPELLANT)
                      AND:
                      1.   MAHADEVI W/O. NARAYAN HONAVAR,
                           AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                           R/O: VANDOOR , TQ: HONAVAR,
                           DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 334.

                      2.   MAHABALESHWAR S/O. NARAYAN HONAVAR,
                           AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: PETTY BUSINESS,
                           R/O. AT BANK STREET, HONAVAR,
                           TQ: HONAVAR, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 334.
                              -2-
                                            NC: 2025:KHC-D:5771
                                         RSA No. 5073 of 2013




3.   VIGNESHWAR S/O. NARAYAN HONAVAR,
     AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
     R/O: VANDOOR , TQ: HONAVAR,
     DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 334.

4.   KAMALAXI D/O. NARAYAN HONAVAR,
     AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: VANDOOR , TQ: HONAVAR,
     DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 334.

5.   KALAVATI D/O. NARAYAN HONAVAR,
     AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: VANDOOR , TQ: HONAVAR,
     DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 334.

6.   NAGARATNA D/O. NARAYAN HONAVAR,
     AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: VANDOOR , TQ: HONAVAR,
     DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 334.
                                                 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. J.S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R6)
      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 16/10/2012 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, HONAVAR IN R.A.NO.289/2001 AND ALSO SET-ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 12/04/2000 PASSED BY THE
ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), HONAVAR IN O.S.NO.26/1983
AND DISMISS THE SUIT O.S.NO.26/1983 ON THE FILE OF THE
ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), HONAVAR, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.


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



CORAM:    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
                               -3-
                                         NC: 2025:KHC-D:5771
                                     RSA No. 5073 of 2013




                         ORAL JUDGMENT

There is no representation on behalf of the

appellants.

Perusal of the order sheet would indicate that,

the counsel representing the appellants has been

retired from the case and thereafter, no appearance

on behalf of the appellants. This would indicate that,

appellants are not interested to prosecute the appeal.

Accordingly, the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed

for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

SB CT-MCK