Dismissed¶53

H.M.Mohan Kumar v. H.B. Manjegowda

Karnataka HC24 Feb 2025RFA/713/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court RFA dismissed for non-prosecution (24.02.2025); appellants absent and paper book never filed despite extensions on 10.03.2020, 27.08.2024 and 30.01.2025; appeal under S.96 CPC against judgment/decree dated 25.02.2014 in O.S.No.62/2007, Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hassan; respondents include Karnataka State Financial Corporation; no merits argued, no issues decided; procedural-default precedent only.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution, as the appellants made no representation when the matter was called out and did not file the paper book despite repeated opportunities, indicating they are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. ¶53

H.M.Mohan Kumar Vs H.B. Manjegowda — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:8212-DB R.F.A. No.713/2014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.713/2014

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

H.M. MOHAN KUMAR

¶9

Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM

¶10

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

S/O LATE H.B. MANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT. P & T COLONY HASSAN 34.

¶12

SMT. M. SUDHA W/O D.R. JAVAREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT. MANJUNATHA NAGAR, 4TH CROSS, BANGALORE 10.

¶13

SMT. M. SUMA W/O K.N. YOGESH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT. SHANTHINAGAR HASSAN 34.

¶14

…APPELLANTS

¶15

(BY SRI. K.C. PRATHEEP, ADV., [ABSENT])

¶16

AND:

¶17

H.B. MANJEGOWDA DEAD BY LR'S SMT. JAYAMMA, W/O LATE H.B. MANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT, DOOR NO.51,

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:8212-DB R.F.A. No.713/2014

¶20

P & T COLONY, HASSAN 34.

¶21

H.M. SHIVASHANKAR S/O H.B. MANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT. 12TH D MAIN MANJUNNATHA NAGAR BANGALORE 10.

¶22

RAMASHEKAREGOWDA S/O LATE HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT. MARUTHI NILAYA DODDI ROAD, HASSAN 24.

¶23

SAVITHRAMMA W/O RAMASHEKAREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS MARUTHI NILAYA DODDI ROAD, HASSAN 24.

¶24

K.C. MANJUNATHA S/O CHANNAKESHAVASHETTY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT. K.B.HALLI VILLAGE CHIKKAMANGALUR TALUK CHIKKAMANGALUR DISTRICT 56.

¶25

K.C. THIRTHAPRAKASH S/O CHANNAKESHAVASHETTY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT. K.B. HALL VILLAGE CHIKKAMANGALUR TALUK CHIKKAMANGALUR DISTRICT 56.

¶26

KALEGOWDA S/O KARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS.

¶27

EREGOWDA S/O KARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8212-DB R.F.A. No.713/2014

¶29

RANGASWAMYGOWDA S/O KARIGOWDA

¶30

AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

¶31

KRISHNA S/O DYAVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

¶32

NAGARAJ S/O DYAVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

¶33

RESPONDENT NOS.7 TO 11 ARE R/AT AREKALLU HOSAHALLI HANDINAKERE POST, KASABA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK 56.

¶34

KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION HEAD OFFICE AT KSFC BHAVAN NO.1/1 THIMMAIAH ROAD NEAR CONTONMENT RAILWAY STATION BANGALORE 52 HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT RACE COURSE ROAD HASSAN 56

¶35

REP BY ASST. GENERAL MANAGER.

¶36

K.H. NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE HANUMASETTY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS SRINIVASA TRADERS KURUBARABUDHIHAL CHIKKAMANGALUR TALUK CHIKKAMANGALUR DISTRICT-45.

¶37

…RESPONDENTS

¶38

(BY SRI. VINAY KUMAR G.S. ADV., FOR R12 SRI. C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADV., FOR R13 R1 SERVICE OF NOTICE OF D/W V.C.O.DTD:16.12.2019 R2 APPEAL DISMISSED V.C.O.DTD:16.12.2019 R3 TO R11 SERVED)

¶39

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:8212-DB R.F.A. No.713/2014

¶41

THIS RFA IS FILED U/S 96 of CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, PERUSE THE SAME AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED IN THE PLAINT BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.02.2014 IN O.S.NO.62/2007 PASSED BY ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT HASSAN, AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶42

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶43

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶44

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶45

( PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL )

¶46

The order sheet indicates that the appellants were provided time to file the paper book on 10.03.2020, 27.08.2024 and 30.01.2025. On 30.01.2025, this Court passed the following order:

¶47

"There is no representation for the appellants.

¶48

The order dated 27.08.2024 indicates that finally, two weeks time was granted to file paperbook. Neither paperbook is filed, nor there is representation for the appellants.

¶49

Further period of two weeks is granted to file paperbook, failing which, list this appeal for passing appropriate orders on 24.02.2025."

¶50

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8212-DB R.F.A. No.713/2014

¶51

2. We also notice that the appeal against respondent

¶52

No.2 is dismissed vide order dated 16.12.2019.

¶53

Today the matter is called out, there is no representation for the appellants nor the paper book is filed. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for nonprosecution.

¶54

Pending applications, if any, do not survive for

¶55

consideration.

¶56

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

¶57

Sd/-

¶58

(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

¶59

BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18