Dismissed

Sri Krishnamurthy @ Vasu v. Sri M D Narayanappa

Karnataka HC26 Mar 2024RSA/723/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a regular second appeal for non-prosecution. The appellant failed to appear multiple times despite granting time and issuing notices. The court noted the appellant was absent unrepresented and did not adhere to office objections.

What did the court decide?

The regular second appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Cost of Rs.1,000/ was awarded for notices.

Sri Krishnamurthy @ Vasu Vs Sri M D Narayanappa — Execution and Attachment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:12521 RSA No. 723 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 723 OF 2019 (PAR)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. KRISHNAMURTHY @ VASU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O. M.D. VENKATARAMANAPPA, RESIDING AT KRISHNAPURA, VILLAGE, MASTHI HOBLI, MALUR TALUK - 563 139.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(APPELLANT (ABSENT) COURT NOTICE SERVED TO APPELLANT AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SRI. M.D. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, SON OF LATE SRI. DASAPPA, RESIDING AT NO.16 & 16/1, K.V. TEMPLE STREET, BALEPETE , BENGALURU - 53.

¶13

M.D. VENKATARAMANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, S/O. LATE SRI. DASAPPA.

¶14

SMT. JAYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, D/O. LATE SRI. DASAPPA.

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:12521 RSA No. 723 of 2019

¶17

SRI. SHIVARAM, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, S/O. M.D. VENKATARAMANAPPA.

¶18

SMT. SHARADAMMA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, D/O. M.D. VENKATARAMANAPPA.

¶19

SRI. MAHESH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O. M.D. VENKATARAMANAPPA.

¶20

SRI. SATHISH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, S/O. M.D. VENKATARAMANAPPA.

¶21

SRI. RAGHUNATH, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, S/O. M.D. VENKATARAMANAPPA,

¶22

THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 8 ARE RESIDING AT KRISHNAPURA VILLAGE, MASTHI HOBLI, MALUR TALUK - 563 139.

¶23

SRI. VENKATESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, SON OF LATE SRI. PERUMALAPPA, RESIDING AT VENKATARAMANASWAMY TEMPLE STREET, MALUR - 563130.

¶24

SMT. M.S. ANURADHA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:12521 RSA No. 723 of 2019

¶27

W/O. SRI. RAMAMURTHY, D/O. SRI. M.D. NARAYANA.

¶28

SMT. M.S. VANITHA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, W/O. SRI. ASHWATHAPPA, D/O. SRI M.D. NARAYANA,

¶29

RESPONDENTS NO.10 AND 11 ARE RESIDING AT NO.16 AND 16/1, K.V. TEMPLE STREET, BALEPETE, BENGALURU - 560 053.

¶30

…RESPONDENTS

¶31

THIS RSA FILED UNDER SEC.100 R/W ORDER XLII RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.01.2019 PASSED IN RA.NO.10/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.12.2016 PASSED IN OS.NO.584/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., MALUR. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

On 04.01.2024 as none appeared for the appellant, one week's time was granted to comply with the office objections subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,000/-. It was also made clear failing to comply with office objections would result in dismissal of appeal.

¶34

On 22.01.2024 matter was listed upon a memo purportedly moved on behalf of the appellant. On the said date

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:12521 RSA No. 723 of 2019

¶37

one Sri. Nagaraju, learned counsel claiming to be the colleague of Sri. Tharesh R, the learned counsel on record for the appellant submitted that said Sri. Tharesh R, passed away and that he would intimate the appellant in the matter and would make necessary submission on obtaining instructions. However, the said learned counsel Sri. Nagaraju, pleaded ignorance about memo having moved for posting of the matter. Matter was thus adjourned to be posted on 31.01.2024.

¶38

On 31.01.2024 there was no representation, as such this Court, issued Court notice to appellant returnable by 19.02.2024 and thereafter on 04.03.2024.

¶39

Court notice was sought to be served through Principle District and Session Judge, Kolar District. A Nazir report of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Malur, has been forwarded to this Court along with copies of the notice that was issued to the appellant. It is stated that the said notice could not be served on the appellant as he is not residing at the said address. A shara with signature of the villagers has also been enclosed with the report.

¶40

In view of the aforesaid peculiar facts of the matter and in view of continued absence of the appellant and learned

¶41

¶42

NC: 2024:KHC:12521 RSA No. 723 of 2019

¶43

counsel for the appellant in the matter, the Appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.

¶44

However, it is made clear that if and when the appellant appears and submits an application seeking recall of this order, the same would be considered in accordance with law.

¶45

Sd/JUDGE

¶46

CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Sri Krishnamurthy @ Vasu v. Sri M D Narayanappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Krishnamurthy @ Vasu v. Sri M D Narayanappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Subbarayappa Vs Sri. Sadappa Dead by Lrs Smt. Venkatamma

Sri.M.R Rajath, Vs Sri. Shivanna

Muddappa S/O Basappa Vs Shivanna

Sri. v. Krishna Vs the Secretary

Sri. Mahadevappa Vs Smt. Drakshayanamma

Smt Mahadevamma Vs Smt Kempadevamma