Karnataka High Court
Siddarangaiah vs Smt. Sreerangamma on 15 October, 2024
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:41617
RFA No. 2453 of 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2453 OF 2006 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. SIDDARANGAIAH
DEAD BY LRS
1(a) SMT.JAYAMMA
W/O LATE SIDDARANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS
1(b) RENUKAPRASAD
S/O LATE SIDDARANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
1(c) SMT. MAHALAXMI
D/O LATE SIDDARANGAIAH
W/O SOMANNA
Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
by DEVIKA M R/AT NO.291,
Location: HIGH MAHALAKSHMI NILAYA
COURT OF RBI LAYOUT,
KARNATAKA
CHIKKAVEERAIAHNA PALYA
TAVAREKERE,
BENGALURU SOUTH-562130.
1(d) NAGARAJA N.S.
S/O LATE SIDDARANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
1(e) SMT.VIKAYALAKSHMI
D/O LATE SIDDARANGAIAH
W/O SHREEDHAR
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:41617
RFA No. 2453 of 2006
1(a), 1(b), 1(d) AND 1(e) ARE
RESIDENTS OF NARASANDRA VILLAGE
KUDDUR HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562127.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI PARASHURAM R. HATTARAKIHAL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SREERANGAMMA
W/O LATE SIDDAPPA
DEAD
2. K.S. REVANNASIDDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
3. K.C. RANGASWAMY
DEAD BY HIS LRS
3(a) SMT.BHAGYAMMA
W/O LATE K.C.RANGASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
3(b) SHASHIKUMAR
S/O LATE K.C.RANGASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
3(c) PRADEEP KUMAR
S/O LATE K.C.RANGASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT NO.159,
RANGANATHASWAMY NILAYA
KOTE, KUNIGAL TOWN
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
4. PUTTARANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:41617
RFA No. 2453 of 2006
RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 ARE
SONS OF LATE JAYALAXMAMMA
5. MAHALAKSHMI
D/O SREERANGAMMA
6. MANGAMMA
D/O MAHALAKSHMAMMA
W/O LATE VENKATARAMANAIAH
7. REVAMMA ALIAS TERAMMA
D/O SREERANGAMMA
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 7 ARE
RESIDENTS OF KOTE,
KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
8. MYLARAIAH
S/O MALLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
9. SMT. B. SHARADAMMA
W/O MYLARAIAH
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.8 AND 9 ARE
R/O. UPPAR BEEDHI,
KUNIGAL TOWN
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
10. NARAYAN S/O MUDUGERE
DEAD BY LRS
10(a) SMT. NEELAMMA
W/O LATE NARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
10(b) MANJUNATH
S/O LATE NARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:41617
RFA No. 2453 of 2006
10(c) SANTHOSH
S/O LATE NARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
ALL ARE R/O. BRAHMIN STREET
MASON, KUNIGAL TOWN
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
11. K.A. NAGARAJ
S/O ACHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/O FORT AREA (KOTE)
KUNIGAL TOWN
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
12 SRI SHIVANANJAPPA
S/O LATE GANGACHANNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
BAGENAHALLI VILLAGE
KOTTAGERE HOBLI
KUNIGAL TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
(INSERTED BY ORDER DT.14.9.2023)
...RESPONDENTS
(VIDE ORDER DATED 23.10.2010,
APPEAL AGAINST R1 IS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION;
VIDE ORDER DATED 13.10.2015,
NOTICE TO R2, R3(a), R4 TO R5 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT;
R2, R3(a), R4, R5, R3(b & c) ARE
MINORS REPRESENTED BY R3(a);
R8, R11 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED,
VIDE ORDER DATED 16.12.2015, NOTICE TO R9, R10 (a to c)
ARE HELD SUFFICIENT BY WAY OF PAPER PUBLICATION;
SRI BIPIN HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R12)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.09.2005
PASSED IN O.S.NO.32/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN.) KUNIGAL, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION
AND SEPARATE POSSESSION AND MESNE PROFITS.
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:41617
RFA No. 2453 of 2006
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo of retirement along with three postal track sheet for having issued the notice to legal representatives of the appellant wherein it was served on Jayamma, Renukhaprasad and Smt.Vijayalakshmi and in respect of other two appellants Smt.Mahalakshmi and Nagaraj.N.S is returned with endorsement intimation delivered unclaimed. Hence, it is clear that out of five appellants, three are served personally and for other two, intimation was delivered and not claimed and hence, held sufficient. It shows that appellants are not interested in pursuing the matter inspite of notice. Hence, appellant's counsel is permitted to retire from the case. In view of service of notice to legal representatives of appellant and three appellants who have been served are not pursuing the -6- NC: 2024:KHC:41617 RFA No. 2453 of 2006 matter and also not claimed by other two appellants having the knowledge. Hence, R.F.A is dismissed for non- prosecution.
Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE RHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16