Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Smt. Kanchamma Vs Smt. Varadamma — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Smt. Kanchamma Vs Smt. VaradammaSmt. Kanchamma v. Smt. Varadamma

Dismissed¶37

Smt. Kanchamma v. Smt. Varadamma

Karnataka HC2 Jun 2025RSA/1681/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court at Bengaluru, decided 02.06.2025 by Justice Ashok S. Kinagi. RSA No. 1681 of 2013 (PAR), filed under Section 100 CPC against judgment and decree dated 20.07.2013 in R.A.No.147/2006 confirming decree dated 14.08.2006 in O.S.No.191/2000, Nagamangala. Parties: Smt. Kanchamma (appellant, in person after counsel's retirement) v. Smt. Varadamma, Udaya and T. Leelavati (respondents; Sri M.G. Raveesha for respondent no.1). Result: appeal dismissed for non-prosecution - appellant absent despite service of court notice issued vide order dated 20.07.2021. Keywords: non-prosecution, dismissal of second appeal, Section 100 CPC, counsel retirement, ex parte absence.

What did the court decide?

The Court found that the appellant was not interested in prosecuting the appeal, as she remained absent despite service of court notice and the appeal was of the year 2013.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the regular second appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution, given that the appellant remained absent despite service of court notice and the appeal has been pending since 2013.

Court's answer

The Court found that the appellant was not interested in prosecuting the appeal, as she remained absent despite service of court notice and the appeal was of the year 2013.

Ratio / Principle

The regular second appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular Second Appeal No. 1681 of 2013 under Section 100 CPC against the judgment and decree dated 20.07.2013 in R.A.No.147/2006 (Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nagamangala), which had dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree dated 14.08.2006 in O.S.No.191/2000 (Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Nagamangala). The learned counsel for the appellant was permitted to retire vide order dated 11.02.2020. Vide order dated 20.07.2021 the Court issued court notice to the appellant to provide an opportunity; the notice was served, but the appellant remained absent. Holding that the appellant was not interested in prosecuting the appeal pending since 2013, the High Court (Ashok S. Kinagi, J.) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

A

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18581 RSA No. 1681 of 2013

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1681 OF 2013 (PAR)

BETWEEN:

SMT. KANCHAMMA D/O LATE VARADAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O GANIGER BEEDI, NAGAMANGAL TOWN, MANDYA-571401.

…APPELLANT

(BY SMT. KANCHAMMA, APPELLANT)

AND:

SMT. VARADAMMA D/O LATE VARADAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

UDAYA S/O N.D. DASAPPA

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

T. LEELAVATI W/O KRISHNAMURTHY AGE: MAJOR

ALL ARE R/O GANIGER BEEDI, NAGAMANGALA TOWN, MANDYA-571401.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. M.G. RAVEESHA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; NOTICE SERVED ON RESPONDENT NO.2;

VIDE ORDER DATED 30.05.2017, NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT;

VIDE ORDER DATED 21.12.2018, APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED AGAINST PROPOSED RESPONDENT NOS.1(1) TO 1(3))

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18581 RSA No. 1681 of 2013

HC-KAR

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.07.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.147/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NAGAMANGALA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 14.08.2006 PASSED IN O.S.NO.191/2000 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC, NAGAMANGALA.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal was filed by the appellant through the learned counsel, and the learned counsel for the appellant had filed a memo for retirement from the case. This Court, vide order dated 11.02.2020, permitted the learned counsel to retire from the case.

This Court, vide order dated 20.07.2021, passed the following order:-

"On 11.02.2020, the counsel appearing for the appellant was permitted to retire from the case on the basis of the office note, whereby the appellant had acknowledged the receipt of entire case file along with no objection.

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18581 RSA No. 1681 of 2013

HC-KAR

It appears that despite lapse of nearly one and half year, no steps have been taken to make alternative arrangement. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. However, in the interest of justice, in order to provide an opportunity to the appellant, issue court notice to the appellant."

Pursuant to the order dated 20.07.2021, the Court

notice was issued, and the notice was served on the appellant. Despite service of Court notice, the appellant remained absent. As the appeal is of the year 2013, it shows that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

4. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-

prosecution.

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

PMR

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the regular second appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution, given that the appellant remained absent despite service of court notice and the appeal has been pending since 2013.medium confidence¶36
The court held
The Court found that the appellant was not interested in prosecuting the appeal, as she remained absent despite service of court notice and the appeal was of the year 2013.ratio¶36

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Code of Civil Procedure100¶25

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment and decree dated 20.07.2013 in R.A.No.147/2006 dismissing the first appeal and confirming the trial court judgment and decree dated 14.08.2006 in O.S.No.191/2000.¶25
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nagamangala · 20.07.2013
Prior proceeding
Trial suit O.S.No.191/2000 ended in judgment and decree dated 14.08.2006 by the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Nagamangala, which the first appellate court confirmed.¶25
Prior proceeding
Learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo for retirement; the Court permitted the counsel to retire vide order dated 11.02.2020.¶29
Prior proceeding
Vide order dated 20.07.2021, the Court, in the interest of justice, directed issuance of court notice to the appellant to provide an opportunity, noting no steps taken for nearly one and a half years.¶34
Prior proceeding
Pursuant to the order dated 20.07.2021, court notice was issued and served on the appellant; despite service, the appellant remained absent.¶36
Prior proceeding
Notice was served on respondent no.2.¶20
Prior proceeding
Vide order dated 30.05.2017, notice to respondent no.3 was held sufficient.¶21
Prior proceeding
Vide order dated 21.12.2018, the appeal stood dismissed against proposed respondent nos.1(1) to 1(3).¶22

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Smt. Kanchamma D/o Late Varadaiah¶8
Smt. Kanchamma
respondent
Smt. Varadamma D/o Late Varadaiah¶12
Sri M.G. Raveesha
respondent
Udaya S/o N.D. Dasappa¶15
respondent
T. Leelavati W/o Krishnamurthy¶17

Coram

AI extract

Ashok S. Kinagiauthor¶27

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 2 Jun 2025 · June
Registered: 21 Oct 2013
Case no.: RSA/1681/2013
CNR: KAHC010512702013
Bench: Ashok S.kinagi
Disposal: Dismissed for Non-Prosecution
Case type: Regular Second Appeal (RSA)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Ashok S.kinagi

Channappa Vs Sri. Rangegowda
2 May 2025
Smt Singamma Vs Sri Channappa
2 May 2025
M/S K a S Build Tech Vs Sri. Sreerama K
2 May 2025
Smt Mangalamma Vs Sri Ramakrishnaiah
2 Jun 2025
Sri. Govindappa Vs Sri Narayanappa
2 Jun 2025
Smt Premanandini Vs Smt Venkatamma
2 Jun 2025

Cite this judgement

Smt. Kanchamma v. Smt. Varadamma, RSA/1681/2013 (KA), decided on 2 June 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Code of Civil Procedure100

View all statutes

Procedural history8

Judgment and decree dated 20.07.2013 in R.A.No.147/2006 dismissing the first appeal and confirming the trial court judgment and decree dated 14.08.2006 in O.S.No.191/2000.Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nagamangala · 20.07.2013
Trial suit O.S.No.191/2000 ended in judgment and decree dated 14.08.2006 by the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Nagamangala, which the first appellate court confirmed.
Learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo for retirement; the Court permitted the counsel to retire vide order dated 11.02.2020.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Ashok S. Kinagi

Parties & counsel