Dismissed¶40

Smt Mustar Taz v. Smt Jowhar Taz

Karnataka HC9 Dec 2025RSA/1812/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; Dr. Justice K.Manmadha Rao; RSA No. 1812 of 2016 (PAR) under Section 100 CPC; appeal by daughters of late Mohammed Eliaz against first appellate judgment of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kolar in RA No.36/2016 (RA No.36/2011) confirming decree in OS No.419/2006 of II Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Kolar; counsel Vivekananda T P permitted to retire; appellants absent despite notice; appeal dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.12.2025; no adjudication on merits; no precedent on the underlying property dispute.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt Mustar Taz Vs Smt Jowhar Taz — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:53098 RSA No. 1812 of 2016

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1812 OF 2016 (PAR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT MUSTAR TAZ AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

¶9

SMT. KUSTAR TAZ AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

¶10

SMT. KOWSAR TAZ AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

¶11

Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

ALL ARE DAUGHTERS OF LATE MOHAMMED ELIAZ AND RESIDENTS OF KENDATTI MADIWALA VILLAGE, VOKKALERI HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK.

¶13

(BY SRI. VIVEKANANDA T P., ADVOCATE)

¶14

…APPELLANTS

¶15

AND:

¶16

SMT JOWHAR TAZ AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS D/O LATE MOHAMMED ELIAZ

¶17

MOHAMMED ARIF

¶18

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O LATEL MOHAMMED ELIAZ

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:53098 RSA No. 1812 of 2016

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

SMT. GOWHAR TAZ AGED ABOUT 45 YEAWRS D/O LATE MOHAMMED ELIAZ

¶22

MOHAMMED ZABIR AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS S/O LATE MOHAMMED ELIAZ

¶23

RIYAZ AHMED @ RAFIQ AHMED AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

¶24

SMT. SHARFUNNISSA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS W/O LATE MOHAMMED ELIAZ

¶25

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF KENDATTI MADIWALA VILLAGE, VOKKALERI HOBLI, ARABIKOTHANUR POST, KOLAR DISTRICT-563130.

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(R2, R4 AND R6 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶28

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.01.2016 PASSED IN RA NO.36/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.01.2011 PASSED IN OS NO.419/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), KOLAR.

¶29

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

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:53098 RSA No. 1812 of 2016

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

¶33

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶34

Learned counsel for the appellants present.

¶35

Sri.T P Vivekananda, learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo for retirement stating that notice sent to appellant No.1 has been served on her brother and notice issued to appellant Nos.2 and 3 has been returned with a postal shara 'refused'.

¶36