The High Court of Karnataka dismissed two regular second appeals filed under Section 100 of CPC for non-prosecution. Counsel for appellants lacked instructions, and appellants No. 2 and 3 failed to appear for multiple hearings.
Both regular second appeals were 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1790 OF 2008 (DEC) C/W REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1791 OF 2008 (DEC/INJ)
IN RSA NO.1790/2008:
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH
Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
R/AT CSI LAYOUT TUMKUR TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 101
R/AT NEAR MARKET SQUARE TUMKURU
TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 101
… APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.MAHESH H., ADV. FOR APPELLANT No.1; SRI B.B.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NO.2; SRI RAJINIKANTH KULKARNI & SRI G.R.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NO.3)
AND:
TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 101
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.K.CHANDRAKANTH ARIGE, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R-2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT; SRI M.R.SHASHIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED U/S 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.04.2008 PASSED IN RA.NO.116/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND CJM., TUMKUR, WHEREBY THE FIRST APPELLATE COURT ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY SETTING ASDIE THE PART OF THE OPERATIVE PORTOIN OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
23.2.2006 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. CIVL JDUGE (JR. DN.), TUMKUR IN O.S. NO.175/1984.
IN RSA NO.1791/2008
BETWEEN:
R/AT HOUSE NO.36 RAILWAY STATION ROAD SOMESHWARAPURA, TUMKURU TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 101
R/AT CSI LAYOUT
TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 101
TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 101
… APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.MAHESH H.,ADVOCATE FOR APPELANT NO.1; SRI B.B.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NO.2; SRI RAJINIKANTH KULKARNI & SRI G.R.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NO.3)
AND:
TUMKURU
TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 101
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.K.CHANDRAKANTH ARIGE, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R-2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT; SRI M.R.SHASHIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED U/S 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.04.2008 PASSED IN RA.NO.91/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND CJM., TUMKUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.02.2006 ASSED BY THE II ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC., TUMKURU IN O.S. NO.175/1984.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2023:KHC:33013 RSA No. 1790 of 2008 C/W RSA No. 1791 of 2008
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for appellant No.1 so also learned counsel for Respondent No.1 are present.
appellants have been given sufficient opportunity but have not availed the same to their benefit.
Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed for nonprosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second appeals should be allowed in the absence of counsel instructions and prosecution.
K.L.Vidya Gowri
M.A.Srimathi
Leela Doctor Das
T.S.Venkatesha Murthy
T.R.Mustaq Ahmed
Srinivas
Pradeep Singh Yerur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
