Dismissed

Smt Pillamma v. Smt Muniyamma

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2023RSA/920/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Regular Second Appeal No. 920 of 2019, the High Court of Karnataka dismissed the appeal for non-compliance of office objections and failure to pay costs despite earlier orders. The court noted that the matter was kept pending previously, yet compliance was still not achieved on the date of hearing, necessitating dismissal of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the Regular Second Appeal for non-compliance of office objections and non-payment of costs.

Smt Pillamma Vs Smt Muniyamma — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:31957 RSA No. 920 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶6

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 920 OF 2019 (PAR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. PILLAMMA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, D/O KUREPPA, W/O SIDDAPPA,

¶9

SMT. BELLAMMA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O KUREPPA,

¶10

W/O LATE KARAMANGALAPPA,

¶11

BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF DINNERI VILLAGE, MASTHI HOBLI, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT PIN – 563 139

¶12

…APPELLANTS

¶13

(BY SRI. VINOD REDDY V., ADVOCATE)

¶14

Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

AND:

¶16

SMT. MUNIYAMMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, D/O KUREPPA, W/O GUDIYAPPA,

¶17

SMT. SHANKARAMMA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, D/O KURAPPA, W/O HOSARAYAPPA,

¶18

SMT. KEMPAMMA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, D/O KURAPPA, W/O SIDDAPPA,

¶19

¶20

NC: 2023:KHC:31957 RSA No. 920 of 2019

¶21

SRI. G MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O MUNIYAMMA AND GUDIYAPPA,

¶22

SRI. BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O MUNIYAMMA AND GUDIYAPPA,

¶23

RESPONDENT Nos.1 TO 5 ARE ALL RESIDENTS OF DINNERI VILLAGE, MASTHI HOBLI, MALUR TALUK, PIN: 563 139

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.11.2018 PASSED IN RA NO.71/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.08.2013 PASSED IN O.S.NO.187/2011 (OLD O.S.NO.112/2007) ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MALUR.

¶26

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

This Court vide order dated 22.8.2023 passed an order to pay cost of Rs.1,000/- and comply with office objections and inspite of the same, office objections are not complied and also not paid the cost and earlier order is also very clear that, if office objections are not complied and cost not paid within two weeks, list this matter for dismissal, and no reason to again

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC:31957 RSA No. 920 of 2019

¶30

¶31

keep the matter pending in view of non compliance of office objections and non payment of cost.

¶32

Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

AP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15

Smt Pillamma v. Smt Muniyamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Pillamma v. Smt Muniyamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Appaswamy Vs Sri G v Thimmaiah

Sri Govindappa Vs Sri N.H. Rehman

Mr Ramanatha Bhat Vs Smt Prabhavathi

Sri Nagabushan Vs Chikkadodaiah

Smt.M.Lalitha Vs Smt.Shashikala

Sri H.G. Sriramana Rao Vs Sri H G Balachandra Rao