Dismissed¶54

Anjanappa v. Muniyellappa

Karnataka HC10 Jun 2025RFA/1816/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: dismissal for non-prosecution; appellant absent / no representation; Section 96 CPC regular first appeal; DEC/INJ suit; Karnataka High Court, single judge (Jyoti Mulimani); neutral citation NC: 2025:KHC:19680; parties residing at Banarahalli/Hoskote (Bangalore Rural) and Varthur/Carmelaram (Bengaluru); counsel: Sri. Babu for appellant (marked absent), Sri. B.S. Chennakeshava for R8; no costs or quantum awarded; no precedent engaged; no dissent.

What did the court decide?

The Regular First Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution: the appellant was not represented when the case was called (including on 24.01.2025 and again on 10.06.2025) and appears not interested in prosecuting the appeal. ¶54

Anjanappa Vs Muniyellappa — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:19680 RFA No. 1816 of 2017

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1816 OF 2017 (DEC/INJ)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

ANJANAPPA SON OF LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT BANARAHALLI ANUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DIST-560 067.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. BABU., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

MUNIYELLAPPA SON OF LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT KODATHIGATE, VARTHUR HOBLI, CARMELARAM POST, SARJAPURA MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 035.

¶15

VENKATARAMAIAH SON OF LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, RESIDING AT BANARAHALLI VILLAGE, ANUGONDAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-560 067.

¶16

MUNIYAPPA SON OF LATE MUNISHAMAPPA,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:19680 RFA No. 1816 of 2017

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT BANARAHALLI VILLAGE, ANUGONDAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-560 067.

¶21

SMT. MUNIYAMMA WIFE OF LATE MUNIMADHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT BANARAHALLI VILLAGE, ANUGONDAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-560 067.

¶22

MADAPPA

¶23

ALIAS MUNIMADAPPA, SON OF LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, SINCE DEAD BY LR'S,

¶24

5(a) MUNITHAYAMMA

¶25

WIFE OF LATE MADAPPA, AGED 30 YEARS,

¶26

5(b) SUNANDAMMA D/O LATE MADAPPA ALIAS MUNIMADAPPA, AGED 30 YEARS,

¶27

5(c) MANJUNATHA

¶28

SON OF LATE MADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

¶29

5(d) DEVENDRA

¶30

SON OF LATE MADAPPA ALIAS MUNIMADAPPA, AGED 33 YEARS,

¶31

5(e) MUNILAKSHMAMMA

¶32

D/O LATE MADAPPA ALIAS MUNIADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

¶33

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19680 RFA No. 1816 of 2017

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

ALL ARE RESIDING AT BANARAHALLI ANUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK,

¶36

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-560 067.

¶37

SMT. MUNIYAMMA D/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA,

¶38

SMT. MUNIYELLAMMA D/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, W/O DASAPPA, AGED MAJOR,

¶39

BOTH OF THEM ARE RESIDING AT BANARAHALLI ANUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI POST, HOSAKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-560 067.

¶40

LOHIT.C.REDDY S/O M.CHANDRAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO. 2491, 17^TH MAIN, HAL 2^ND STAGE, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 008.

¶41

…RESPONDENTS

¶42

(BY SRI. B.S.CHENNAKESHAVA., ADVOCATE FOR R8; R4-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;

¶43

NOTICE TO R5(A, D & E), R6 & R7-HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DATED: 18.04.2023;

¶44

NOTICE TO R2 (A & B) & R3-HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DATED: 18.01.2024)

¶45

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

¶46

96 OF THE CPC.

¶47

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶48

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC:19680 RFA No. 1816 of 2017

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

ORAL ORDER

¶52

When the case is called, the appellant is not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case.

¶53

As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed on 24.01.2025, on that day, when the matter was called, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant, either personally or through video conferencing.

¶54

The appeal is listed today. As could be seen from the appeal papers, the appeal is filed in 2017. Now we are in the month of June 2025. It's almost eight years. As already noted above, when the case is called, the appellant is not represented. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular First Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶55

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶56

MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12

Anjanappa v. Muniyellappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjanappa v. Muniyellappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar H K Vs the Commissioner of Excise

Smt. Jayalakshmi Vs Smt.Lakshmidevi

M/S Mct Cards and Technology Private Limited Vs Mangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited

Sri.Ashwathnarayana Vs Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited

Vijayalakshmi Hydro Power P Ltd. Vs Chamundeshwari Electricity Supply Company Limited

Sri Rajakumar Vs the State of Karnatak a