IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 823 OF 2018 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN:
PUTTASWAMY SON OF LATE NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDENT OF SY. NO. 77 BIDAREKAVALU GARDEN HOUSE ARSIKERE TALUK.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.N. BHAT., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND:
NINGEGOWDA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR’S.
1. SMT. GANGAMMA, WIFE OF LATE NINGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDENT OF BIDAREKAVALU, GANDSI HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT.
2. SMT. KOMALA WIFE OF YOGEHS, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDENT OF BASTIHALLI VILLAGE, NONAVINAKERE HOBLI, TIPATURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
3. SMT. LALITHAMMA WIFE OF SUBBEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDENT OF THIMLAPURA, DANDIGANAHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT.
4. SMT. SHASHIKALA WIFE OF BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, HONNAVALLI HOBLI, TIPATURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
5. SMT. GOWRAMMA WIFE OF KUMARA, AGED ABOUT 37 VILLAGE, RESIDENT OF TURUVEKERE VILLAGE, NUGGENAHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPTNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT.
6. SMT. BHARATHI WIFE OF PARAMESHA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SAVANTHAHALLI VILLAGE, DUDDA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.01.2018 PASSED IN RA.NO. 29/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., ARASIKERE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.06.2016 PASSED IN OS.NO. 3/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CJ & JMFC., ARSIKERE.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Judgment None appears for the appellant. This Court on 16.10.2019 had adjourned the appeal granting three weeks time for compliance with the office objections subject to the condition that the appeal would be listed for dismissal if there is failure to comply with the office objections. Despite this peremptory order, the office objections have not been complied with. It is obvious that the concerned is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed for default.
nv Ct:sr SD/- JUDGE