Dismissed¶¶41

Nagarathnamma v. Mahesha

Karnataka HC8 Jul 2025RSA/1118/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal of Regular Second Appeal (Karnataka High Court, 2025) for non-compliance of office objections and non-payment of cost; appellants' counsel absent; filed under Section 100 r/w Order 42 Rule 1 CPC; challenged R.A.No.22/2017 judgment dated 20.12.2019 (II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mandya) modifying O.S.No.04/2011 decree dated 31.01.2014 (Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Malavalli); Mandya/Ramanagara parties; no merits decided; no quantum involved.

What did the court decide?

The regular second appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections and non-payment of cost, the appellants' counsel having failed to pay the cost and to comply with office objections despite the matter being listed the fourth time for such non-compliance. ¶¶41

Nagarathnamma Vs Mahesha — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:24624 RSA No. 1118 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶8

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1118 OF 2022 (PAR)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

NAGARATHNAMMA

¶11

WIFE OF NAGARAJA MURTHY DAUGHTER OF LATE RACHAPPA @ CHIKKUSAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

¶12

RESIDING AT KAGGALIPURA VILLAGE MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 417.

¶13

SUMITHRA

¶14

Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

WIFE OF RAJU DAUGHTER OF LATE RACHAPPA @ CHIKKUSAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT HARHARA BUBALLI VILLAGE SATANUR HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA – 562 126. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SACHIN R.R., ADVOCATE - ABSENT)

¶16

AND:

¶17

MAHESHA

¶18

SON OF LATE RACHAPPA @ CHIKKUSAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT B.G.PURA B.G. PURA HOBLI MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA - 571 417.

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:24624 RSA No. 1118 of 2022

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

K.R.NAGARATHNA WIFE OF MAHESHA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT B.G.PURA B.G.PURA HOBLI MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA - 571 417.

¶22

SHIVAJI RAO SON OF LATE KRISHNA RAO AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF SRI BILIGIRI RANGA SWAMY CANTEEN, 20^TH CROSS KEMPAPURA AGRAHARA BENGALURU - 560 067.

¶23

N.S.GUNESH SON OF SAMPATH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 47 YEAR S RESIDING AT THOREKADANAHALLI VILLAGE HALAGURU HOBLI MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA – 571 421.

¶24

SHIVAKUMAR SWAMY SON OF LATE G. SOMASHEKARAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.12 WARD NO.31, 2^ND STAGE ARCHAKARA HALLI RAMANAGARA - 562 159.

¶25

B.M.SHIVASWAMY SON OF LATE MADAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.212 SHIVAKRUPANILAYA WARD NO.03, NES EXTENSION MALAVALLI TOWN MANDYA - 571 430.

¶26

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:24624 RSA No. 1118 of 2022

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

CHANDRASHEKARA SWAMIGALU SON OF RENOUNCED AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT HORAMATA PEETADHYAKSHA B.G.PURA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA - 571 417.

¶30

…RESPONDENTS

¶31

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 R/W ORDER 42 RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.12.2019 PASSED IN R.A.NO.22/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.01.2014 PASSED IN O.S.NO.04/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MALAVALLI.

¶32

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

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶34

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶35

Learned counsel for the appellants is absent.

¶36