Regular first appeal against a decree of declaration and possession was listed after an earlier opportunity to cure office objections. No one appeared for the appellant, the requisites were not filed, and the appeal was dismissed for default.
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,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100261 OF 2019 (DEC/PAR)
BETWEEN:
SHRI. HUSSAINSAB S/O. DAWALSAB MULLA, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: NAGANUR VILLAGE, TQ: RAMADURG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591123.
(BY SRI. D.B.KARIGAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD Date: 2024.09.18 10:09:21 +0530
TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELGAVI-591123.
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NAGANUR VILLAGE,
TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELGAVI-591123.
TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591123.
TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591123.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6, R8, R10 TO R14; NOTICE TO R18 TO R20, R22 TO R26 – SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;
R7, R16, R17, R21 - DECEASED)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 R/W SEC. 96(1) OF C.P.C., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.02.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.30/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RAMDURG, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR DECLARATION AND POSSESSION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD)
This Court’s order on 27.08.2024 reads as under:
“Sri.D.B.Karigar, the learned counsel for the appellant, submits that this Court may grant him reasonable time to attend to the office objection [which includes not filing the second set of the appeal papers] as there could be some oversight from his office.
Only as personal reasons are assigned, the appeal is directed to be re-listed on 17.09.2024 with liberty to the learned counsel to attend to office objections and furnish requisites as also to take steps observing that if there is any default in any of the afore, the appeal shall be listed for dismissal.”
None appears for the appellant, and this Court must observe that despite opportunity as aforesaid and for reasons recorded, the needful has not been done. It would
NC: 2024:KHC-D:13195-DB RFA No. 100261 of 2019
only be reasonable to conclude that the concerned is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the appeal
stands dismissed for default.
Sd/-
(B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
Sd/(C M JOSHI) JUDGE
BVV Ct: VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Hussainsab s/o Dawalsab Mulla
Smt. Sumitra Basappa @ Basavaraj Kabadad
Smt. Savita Shivanand Sakri
Shri. Devaraj Basappa @ Basavaraj Kabadad
Shri. Santosh Basappa @ Basavaraj Kabadad
Smt. Devakka Shivappa Panchannavar @ Doddalinganavar
B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
C M JOSHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
