IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.214 OF 2017 (INJ) BETWEEN 1. SRI. CHAMARAJENDRA URSU BOARDING SCHOOL BY ITS COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT SARASWATHIPURAM MYSURU-570 005 REP: BY ITS PRESIDENT H.H.SMT PRAMODA DEVI WADIYAR W/O. LATE H.H.SRI SRIKANTADATTA NARASIMHA RAJA WADIYAR AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT MYSURU PALACE MYSURU-570 001 2. Dr. BHARATHI SRIDHAR RAJ URS W/O B.S. SRIDHAR RAJ URS AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT NO.435, 3RD STAGE GOKULAM MYSURU-570 002 VICE PRESIDENT 3. SRI MAHESH N. URS S/O CAPT. A.L. CHANNARAJ URS AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT “RISHI NIVAS” NO.1-C VIHARA MARGA, SIDDARTHA NAGAR MYSURU-570 007 HON. SECRETARY 4. SRI SARDAR D.N.SRIKANTA RAJ URS S/O D.NANJARAJ URS AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/AT NO.4549, 6TH CROSS ST.MARY’S ROAD, N.R.MOHALLA MYSURU-570 007 JOINT SECRETARY 5. SMT. NALINI URS W/O VIJAUACHANDRA RAJ URS AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT NO.826 GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE ROAD HINKAL, MYSURU-570 046 TRUSTEE 6. SRI PRABHUDEVARAJ URS S/O B.R. LINGA RAJE URS AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT NO.161, “MUNJANE” ‘B’ BLOCK, 5TH MAIN J.P.NAGAR, MYSURU-570 008 TRUSTEE 7. SRI SURESH V.HAMPE S/O LATE H.P.NIRANJAN RAJ URS AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT ‘KANTI VILAS’ NO.917/1 GOPALASWAMY, SHISHUVIHARA ROAD LAKSHMIPURAM MYSURU-570 004 TRUSTEE … APPELLANTS (By Sri R S RAVI, ADVOCATE-ABSENT) AND THE UNIVERSITY OF MYSURU CRAWFORD HALL MYSURU-570 001 REP: BY ITS REGISTRAR ... RESPONDENT THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DTD:31.03.2016 PASSED IN RA.NOS.1012/2009 (247/2005) ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED: 28.07.2005 PASSED IN OS.NO.725/1967 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL FIRST CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), MYSURU.
THIS RSA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING :
J U D G M E N T No representation for the appellants upto 2-45 p.m. This matter is being listed fourth time for compliance of office objections. Despite granting sufficient opportunity, office objections are not complied. Therefore, appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE cp*