✦ Karnataka High Court

PATEL AYYANNA GOWDA v. SRI SRINIVASA

RSA No. 19 of 2018K S HEMALEKHA3 min read

Case at a glance

Bench
K S HEMALEKHA
Neutral citation
2026:KHC:20063

Outcome

Dismissed

Hence, the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed for non-

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 44. Appellant Nos.2 to 4 have not entered appearance and the appeal is of the year 2018. It appears that the - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:20063 RSA No. 19 of 2018 HC-KAR appellants have not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular Second Appeal…

Judgment

SRI SUBBE GOWDA S/O LATE AYYANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS

2. SRI PRASANNA S/O NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

3. SRI RADHAKRISHNA S/O NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

4. SRI NAGARAJU S/O LATE AYYANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS APPELLANT NOS.1 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT: SUBBANAHALLY HALEKOTE HOBLI H N PURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT

5. SRI JAYANNA S/O LATE AYYANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT CORPORATION BANK - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:20063 RSA No. 19 of 2018 HC-KAR SAGAR TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 201. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. S V LAKSHMINARAYANA AND SRI. P C NITHYANANDAN., ADVOCATE) AND:

1.

SRI SRINIVASA S/O CHIKKEGOWDA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS 1(A) SMT JANAKAMMA W/O LATE SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 1(B) SRI PABHAKARA S/O SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 1(C) SRI YOGESH S/O SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS 1(E) SMT MANJULA D/O SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT: CHINTANAHALLI VILLAGE, DUDDA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK - 573 201. 1(F) VEENA D/O SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIGIND AT: GAVENAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK PIN - 573 201 - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:20063 RSA No. 19 of 2018 HC-KAR

5.

SMT KALPANA W/O UMESH D/O NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS SMT KUMARI W/O SARVOTHAM D/O NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS SHANTHA D/O NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 ARE RESIDENTS OF KANANAHALLY, NEAR SUBBANAHALLY, HALEKOTE HOBLI, H N PURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201. SMT BHAGYALAKSHMI W/O GANGAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS BHAGYASHREE NILAYA R/O B KATIHALLY KAPPALU ARASOLERE ROAD HASSAN - 573 201

10.

SMT LAKSHMI W/O SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT: SUBBANAHALLY HALEKOTE HOBLI H N PURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201. (BY SRI. PRAKASH M H.,ADVOCATE FOR 1(A TO E); NOTICE TO R5 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) …RESPONDENTS - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:20063 RSA No. 19 of 2018 HC-KAR THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 R/W ORDER XLII RULE 1 OF CPC.,AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 02.11.2016 PASSED IN RA.NO.38/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 5TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 27.01.2012 PASSED IN OS.NO.99/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,HASSAN. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT Court notice issued to the appellants by this Court on

10.10.2025 is returned with letter from the Registry of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Hassan, stating that appellant No.1 is dead and appellant Nos.2 to 4 are duly served.

2.

Appellant Nos.2 to 4 are called out, remained absent and unrepresented.

3.

Appellant No.1 being reported to be dead, the appeal against appellant No.1 stands abated.

Operative part

4.

Appellant Nos.2 to 4 have not entered appearance and the appeal is of the year 2018. It appears that the - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:20063 RSA No. 19 of 2018 HC-KAR appellants have not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed for non-

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. XLII r. 1.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. RSA No. 19 of 2018). ← Search more judgments