Dismissed¶34

Smt. R. Manjula v. Shri. Arul Moli

Karnataka HC15 Apr 2026RFA/1033/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; RFA No. 1033 of 2013 (POS); Section 96 CPC; appeal dismissed for non-prosecution; appellant and counsel absent on two hearings; suit for possession O.S.4512/2009, XXV Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore; decree dated 05.04.2013; appellant sole legal heir of deceased Defendant No.1 B. Gopal Shetty; oral judgment dated 15.04.2026 by Justice M.I. Arun.

What did the court decide?

Since none appeared for the appellant on the date of hearing or on the last date of hearing, and the appellant appears not interested in prosecuting the appeal, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. ¶34

Smt. R. Manjula Vs Shri. Arul Moli — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:20956 RFA No. 1033 of 2013

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶8

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1033 OF 2013 (POS)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. R. MANJULA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS W/O LATE B. GOPALSHETTY R/O NO.288, 8TH CROSS 4TH MAIN ROAD, SRINIVASANAGAR BANASHANKARI 1ST STAGE BANGALORE 560050 (THE DEFENDANT NO.1-SRI. B. GOPAL SHETTY DIED DURING PENDENCY OF SUIT LEAVING BEHIND THE APPELLANT HEREIN BEING HIS ONLY LEGAL HEIR)

¶11

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. L M PANDURANGA SWAMY, ADVOCATE) [ABSENT]

¶14

AND:

¶15

SHRI ARUL MOLI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS S/O LATE SUBRAMANI

¶16

SHRI JAGADEESHA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS S/O LATE SUBRAMANI

¶17

R1 AND R2 ARE R/O NO.31, VINAYAKANAGAR, 3RD MAIN, 8TH CROSS, II BLOCK

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:20956 RFA No. 1033 of 2013

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

BSK I STAGE BANGALORE 560050

¶21

SHRI ARUNACHALAM AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O LATE MUNISWAMY MUDALIAR R/O C/O GOVINDASWAMY NAIDU NO.34, 4TH MAIN, BSK 1ST STAGE BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE SRINIVASANAGAR BANGALORE – 560085

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. VICTOR MANOHARAN S, ADVOCATE FOR LRS OF DECEASED R1 AND R2;

¶24

SRI. M R REVANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶25

THIS RFA IS FILED U/SEC. 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.04.2013 PASSED IN O.S.4512/2009 ON THE FILE OF XXV-ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, DECREEING THE AGAINST DEFENDANT NO.2 AND AND DISMISSING THE AGAINST DEFENDANT NO.3 SUIT FOR POSSESSION.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

None appears for the appellant.

¶30