SRI H R SREENIVAS v. SMT. KAMALAMMA
Case at a glance
- Bench
- RAVI V HOSMANI
- Neutral citation
- 2026:KHC:2131
Outcome
Dismissed
Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH HASSAN ROAD K R NAGARA 571 602 THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST &RESPONDENTS THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 1.10.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.23/2020 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, K.R. NAGARA., DISMISSING…
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 17 OF 2025 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN:
1. SRI H R SREENIVAS S/O LT RAMANUJA IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT NO.A-6 "A" LANE, BARLI STREET POLICE QUARTERS SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE 560 027.
2. SMT. VASANTHA B K., W/O LATE H R NARAYAN R/AT NO. 329, 25TH CROSS, 2ND STAGE BANASHANKARI, BANGALORE 560 027. &APPELLANTS (BY SRI SREE NAGESH B R., ADVOCATE - ABSENT) Location: High Court of Karnataka AND:
SMT. KAMALAMMA, W/O H B SHRIKANTAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT BRAHMANA STREET, HAMPAPURA VILLAGE, HOSA AGRAHARA HOBLI, K R NAGAR TALUK K R NAGARA 571602 - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:2131 RSA No. 17 of 2025 HC-KAR
THE SECRETARY HAMPAPURA GRAMA PANCHAYAT HAMPAPURA VILALGE HOSA AGRAHARA HOBLI, K R NAGARA 571 602.
Operative part
THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH HASSAN ROAD K R NAGARA 571 602 THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST &RESPONDENTS THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 1.10.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.23/2020 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, K.R. NAGARA., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.06.2016 PASSED IN OS NO.9/2011 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, K.R. NAGAR.TRIAL COURT DISMISSED THE SUIT. APPELLATE COURT DISMISSED THE APPEAL. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:2131 RSA No. 17 of 2025 HC-KAR ORAL ORDER This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for 5th time. Despite sufficient opportunity having been granted for compliance earlier, appellants were directed to comply with office objections till closure of Court hours. However, there is no representation and office objections remained un-complied. This would indicate that appellants are not diligently pursuing appeal. Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE Psg* List No.: 2 Sl No.: 82
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 100.
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.