This is a regular second appeal regarding land/property dispute. The High Court held the appeal abated as the first appellant died without substitution, and dismissed the remaining appeal for non-prosecution as appellants failed to appear upon notice.
The appeal abated against appellant No.1; the remainder of the appeal dismissed for non-prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1529 OF 2007 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
S/O MAHAMMAD SAB PEEROJI, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURIST.
ALL ARE R/O YALLIGUTTI VILLAGE, TAL:BILAGI – 581 116. ...APPELLANTS
AND:
2
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC:HH WORK, R/O YALLIGUTTI, TQ:BILAGI NOW R/AT GANI VILLAGE, TQ:BASAVANA BAGEWADI – 586 203.
(APPEAL AGAINST R1 IS ABATED; R2- SERVED)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.03.2007 PASSED BY THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (SR.Dn.), BILAGI IN R.A.NO.04/2005, CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.07.2001 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), BILAGI IN O.S.NO.04/1998 .
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Though the names of appellants is called out thrice in the open Court, there is no representation on behalf of appellants either through video conferencing or in person.
As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the matter was listed on 08.08.2022. On that day, Court issued notice to appellants since learned counsel for appellants had shifted to Bengaluru.
3
Accordingly, Court notice was issued to appellants.
The captioned appeal is listed today for orders regarding report of Principal District and Sessions Court, Bagalkot dated:20.09.2022.
The report of Principal District and Sessions Court, Bagalkot depicts that Smt.Mamtaj Begam – first appellant has died on 14.07.2018 & death certificate is affixed and Sri.Babu Sab, Sri.Sikandar and Sri.Buddesab - appellants 2 to 4 respectively have received the notice on 16.09.2022.
The report of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkote dated:20.09.2022 is noted.
Though appellant No.1 died way back in the year 2018 i.e., on 14.07.2018, the other appellants have not made any efforts to bring the legal representatives of deceased appellant No.1 on record. Hence, the appeal as against appellant No.1 stands abated .
4
The report of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot depicts that the other appellants have received the notice. They have neither engaged services of advocate nor made any efforts to appear either through video conferencing or personally. Their name is shown in the cause list.
As already noted above, though the names of appellants are called out thrice in the open Court, there is no representation on behalf of appellants either through video conferencing or in person. Hence, the Regular Second
Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
TKN
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal stands abated as the first appellant died during pendency without substitution, and whether dismissal for non-prosecution is justified.
Whether the appeal is to be dismissed for non-prosecution given the lack of representation by appellants.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mamtaj Begum W/o Mahammad Sab Peeroji
Babusab S/o Mahammad Sab Peeroji
Sikandar S/o Mahammad Sab Peeroji
Buddesab S/o Mahammad Sab Peeroji
Rabunabi W/o Mehboobsab Peeroji
Allasab S/o Husesab Peeroji
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
