IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.558/2009 (PAR) BETWEEN:
SRI HANUMANTHA GOWDA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT SHIVAKOTE VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK – 562 113 … APPELLANT (BY SRI V.ANAND, ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND:
1. SRI SHAMANNA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 2. SRI ANJANEYASWAMY S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 3. SRI LAKSHMIPATHI S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 4. SRI MUNITHAYAPPA S/O LATE DASARA MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R1 TO R4 ARE R/AT SHIVAKOTE VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT – 562 113 5. SMT.KANTHAMMA D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT ANUR VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT – 562 113 6. SMT.AMMAYAMMA D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT IVARAKANTHAPURA VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT – 562 113 7. SRI K.RAJANNA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT SHIVAKOTE VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK-562 113 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N.SONNE GOUDA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 AND R4; R3, R5, R6 AND R7 ARE SERVED;
R2-SERVICE OF NOTICE IS HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 24.04.2019) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.12.2008 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE SESSIONS AND DISTRICT JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT-II AT BANGALORE (R) DISTRICT IN R.A.NO.42/1995 AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.08.1995 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE IN OS.NO.28/1991.
THIS RSA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T Learned Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 4 opposes adjournment.
2. No representation for the appellant till 11.30 a.m. Records show that on some previous hearing dates also there was no representation for the appellant. This appeal was already once dismissed for non-prosecution. There are concurrent findings.
3. The conduct of the appellant shows that he is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
KSR Sd/- JUDGE