IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE The Hon’ble Mr.Justice B.M.Shyam Prasad Regular Second Appeal No.1489 OF 2017 Between:
SRI. SURESH S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/O KOMMANAHALLI KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 117.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. JAGANNATHAN P., ADVOCATE - ABSENT ) And:
1. SMT. GANGAMMA W/O LATE MUDALAIAH D/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O KOMMANAHALI KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 2. SMT JAYALAKSHMAMMA W/O R VENAKTESH D/O LATE RAMAIAH R/O DODDAGORGHATTA DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK 3. SMT MANJULA W/O R VENKATESH, D/O LATE RAMAIAH R/O DODDAGORAGHATTA DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK 4. SRI JAYARAMAIAH S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O KOMMANAHALLI KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 5. SRI LAKKAPPA S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/O KOMMANAHALLI KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 6. SMT GOWRAMMA D/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/O KAIDALA, NONAVINAKERE HOBLI TIPTUR TALUK 7. SMT DODDANARASAMMA D/O LATE RAMAIAH W/O NANJUNDAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/O KURUBARAHALLI-KOPPA DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK 8. SMT SAVITHRAMMA W/O RAVEESH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O GOWDANAHALLI, SHETTIKERE HOBLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK ... RESPONDENTS THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.04.2017 PASSED IN R.A.NO.22/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GUBBI DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.03.2014 PASSED IN O.S.NO.61/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GUBBI.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Judgment None appears for the appellant. This Court on 02.08.2019 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 preemptory 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.
Sd/- Judge SA Ct:sr