IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO R.S.A No. 1900 OF 2013 BETWEEN 1. Sri Byrappa S/o Late Doddabyrappa Aged about 56 years.
2. Sri Muniraju S/o Late Shamanna Aged about 41 years 3. Sri Ravi Kumar S/o Late Shamanna Aged about 33 years All residing at Veerapura Village & Post Kasaba Hobli Doddaballapura Taluk-561203.
... Appellants (By Sri Vamshi Krishna .C – Advocate - Absent) AND 1. Sri Kempanna S/o Late Chikkabyrappa Aged about 44 years 2. Sri Hanumappa S/o Late Chikkabyrappa Aged about 41 years 3. Sri Nagaraju S/o Late Chikkabyrappa Aged about 39 years Respondents 1 to 3 are residing at Veerapura Village and Post Kasaba Hobli Doddaballapura Taluk-561203.
4. Ramakka W/o. late Lakshmaiah, Aged major, Residing at Aralumallige village, Kasaba Hobli, Doddaballapur Taluk-561 203.
[R-4 deleted vide court order dated 3.12.13] ... Respondents (By Sri Gangadhar – Advocate for R-1 to R-3; R-4 is deleted vide order dated 3.12.13) This RSA is filed under Section 100 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 06.09.2013 passed in R. A. No. 72/2012 on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Doddaballapura, Bangalore Rural District, allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 24.01.2012 passed in O.S. No. 43/2010 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Doddaballapura.
This appeal coming on for Admission this day, the court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT The suit is of the year 2010, which came to be dismissed on 24.01.2012. Against the said dismissal of the suit, plaintiffs filed R.A.No.72/2012. The said appeal came to be allowed by order dated 6.9.2013 decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the said judgment, defendants have preferred the present appeal as on 28.11.2013 seeking to set aside the said judgment passed in R.A.No.72/2012.
2. When the matter is called out, the counsel for appellants – defendants remains absent. There is also no representation on his behalf. It appears that appellants are not interested to prosecute the appeal.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE KS