Dismissed¶¶53

Sri Mahadevashetty v. Sri Siddashetty

Karnataka HC11 Jun 2026RSA.CROB/25/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Abatement — second appeal and cross-objection both dismissed as abated for failure to bring legal representatives of deceased respondent/cross-objector on record; Order 41 Rule 22 CPC r/w Section 100 CPC; RSA No. 260/2017 (INJ) c/w RSA.CROB No. 25/2017; High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; Justice V Srishananda; decided 11-06-2026; courts below at Chamarajanagar (O.S.No.113/2003, decree 18.12.2007; R.A.No.12/2008, decree 13.04.2016 partly allowing appeal); no merits adjudication; no costs or quantum awarded.

What did the court decide?

The regular second appeal stands dismissed as abated by operation of law, upon the appellants' counsel placing on record that there were no instructions to bring the legal representatives of the deceased sole respondent. ¶¶53

Sri Mahadevashetty Vs Sri Siddashetty — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:28393 RSA No. 260 of 2017 C/W RSA.CROB No. 25 of 2017

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 260 OF 2017 (INJ)

¶8

C/W

¶9

RSA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 25 OF 2017

¶10

IN RSA No. 260/2017

BETWEEN:

SIDDASHETTY

SINCE DEAD BY LR’S,

DODDASIDDASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O LATE SIDDASHETTY,

¶15

SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O LATE SIDDASHETTY,

¶16

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

¶17

NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, S/O LATE SIDDASHETTY,

¶18

PUTTAMADASHETTY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O LATE SIDDASHETTY,

¶19

APPELLANTS NO.1 TO 4 ARE R/AT BYADAMOODLU VILLAGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-571 440.

¶20

…APPELLANTS

¶21

(BY SRI.SHIVANANDA R, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.P. NATARAJU.,ADVOCATE)

¶22

¶23

NC: 2026:KHC:28393 RSA No. 260 of 2017 C/W RSA.CROB No. 25 of 2017

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

AND:

¶26

MAHADEVASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O LATE PEEKANA MADASHETTY, R/AT BYADAMOODLU VILLAGE, HARADANAHALLI HOBLI, CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-571 440.

¶27

…RESPONDENT

¶28

(BY SRI. R.C. NAGARAJ.,ADVOCATE)

¶29

THIS RSA IS FILED U/S 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.04.2016 PASSED IN R.A.NO.12/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND C.J.M AT CHAMARAJNAGAR. PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.12.2007 PASSED IN O.S.NO.113/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DIVN) AND J.M.F.C CHAMARAJANAGAR.

¶30

IN RSA.CROB NO. 25/2017

¶31

BETWEEN:

¶32

SRI. MAHADEVASHETTY, S/O. LATE. PEEKANA MADASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT BYADAMOODLU VILLAGE, HARADANAHALLI VILLAGE, CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK & DIST.

¶33

...CROSS OBJECTOR

¶34

(BY SRI. R.C. NAGARAJ.,ADVOCATE)

¶35

AND:

¶36

SRI SIDDASHETTY S/O. LATE. PEEKANA SIDDASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS

¶37

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28393 RSA No. 260 of 2017 C/W RSA.CROB No. 25 of 2017

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

SRI. DODDASIDDASHETTY, S/O. SIDDASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

¶40

SRI. SHIVANNA W/O. SIDDASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

¶41

SRI. NARAYANA, S/O. SIDDASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

¶42

SRI. PUTTAMADASHETTY, S/O. SIDDASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

¶43

ALL ARE RESIDING AT BYADAMOODLUR VILLAGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK & DIST.

¶44

...RESPONDENTS

¶45

THIS RSA CROB IN RSA FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., R/W SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.4.2016 PASSED IN RA NO.12/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, CHAMARAJANAGAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.12.2007 PASSED IN OS NO.113/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC, CHAMARAJANAGAR AND ETC.

¶46

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

¶47

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶48

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28393 RSA No. 260 of 2017 C/W RSA.CROB No. 25 of 2017

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶51

Learned counsel for the appellants Sri.Shivananda R,

¶52

submits on behalf of P.Nataraju that there are no instructions to bring the legal representatives of deceased sole respondent by the appellants.

¶53

Placing his submission on record, appeal stand dismissed as abated by operation of law.

¶54

In the cross-objection, no steps are taken to bring the legal representatives of deceased cross-objector. Accordingly, cross-objection is also dismissed as abated.

¶55

Sd/(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

¶56

GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Sri Mahadevashetty v. Sri Siddashetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Mahadevashetty v. Sri Siddashetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt H P Himakanthi Vs Smt N v Pushpa

Rangashyamaiah Vs Sannappa

Sri. Shaik Ajmal Pash Vs Smt. H.G. Leelavathamma

Siddashetty Vs Mahadevashetty

Sri. Muddappa Gowda Vs Sri. Ramachandra Gowda

Sri. A.N. Amruth Kumar Vs Sri. A.N. Sandeep Kumar