C.. 1 IN TH.E. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA lREUlT BENfl AT GULBARGA DATED THIS THE 8 DAY OF JULY, 2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MItJUSTICE HSLRAMESH BETWEEN: P BAPU RAO S/U LOKMANYA HIBARE AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 0CC: TRADE, R/O RAJESHWAR TALUK BASAVAKAJLYAN DIET. BIDAR 585 330 APPELLANT (BY SRL MANILA PPA PATIL, AD’L) jfl 1814WA]R 5/0 AMBAJ1 TELANG AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS P/U EAJESHWAR TALUK, BASAVAKALYAN DIST BIDAR 585 330 2. SUBHASB S/U RURAPPA MUSTAPURE AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RIO TALUK, BA..SAVALYAN DIET BIDAR 585 320 3 BAN DLBRA 5/0 BAST1RTHAPPA EUJAPURE AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS P/U RAJESHWAR TALUK, 2 BASAVAKALYAN DES? BIDAR 585 330 4. CHANDRAPPA 810 KAMANNA POSTDAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O RAJESHWAR ?AWK BASAVAKALYAN DES? BIDAR 585 330 5. SUBHASH S/0 AMBAJI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/O RAJESHWAR TAWK BASAVAKALYAN DES? BIDAR 585 330 6. ARVIND 5/0 RACHAPPA ATNOOR AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS RIO RAJESHWAR TALUK BASAVAKALYAN DES? BIDAR 585 330 7. SURYAKANT 5/0 SANGAPPA DABKE AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/0 RAJESHWAR TAUJK BASAVAKALYAN DES? BIDAR 585 330 S. RAMESH 5/0 MALLAPPA GOUNDAQAON AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RIO RAJESHWAR TALUK BASAVAKALYAN DIST BIDAR 585 330 9. BABU, 8/0 RACH&YYA SWAMI AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/O RAJESHWAR TALUK BASAVAKALYAN DES? BEOAR 585 330 10. Tt.JKARAM 5/0 MARU’fl UPAR AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RIO RAJESHWAR TALUK BASAVAKALYAN 01ST BIDAR 585 330 e 3 IL SHANTVEER 8/0 SANPPA DABKE AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RIO RAJESHWAR TAWK BASAVAKALYAN DIST BIDAR 585 330 12. NARYAN 8/0 RACHAPPA ATNOOR AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O RAJESHWAR TAWK BASAVAKALYAN 01ST BIDAR 585 330 13. CHANNAPPA 5/0 VEERAPPATAPALI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/O RAJESHWAR TALUK BASAVAKALYAN DIST BIDAR 585 330 ... RESPONDENTS THIS RSA FILED U/S. 100 OP CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD:11.06.07 PASSED IN R.A.NO.22/2000 ON THE FILE OF THE CML JUDGE (SR,DVN,) BASAVAKALYAN,D1SMISSINQ THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD:6.9.200 PASSED IN O.S.N0.202f84 ON THE FILE OF THE CML JUDGE (J.D.)& JMPCB. KALYAN. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This second appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the judgment dated 11.6.2007 passed by the Lower Appellate Court-the Court of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Basavakalyan, in R.A.No.22/2000. By the impugned Judgment, the Lower Appellate Court has CliSilhissed the appeal of the aipeih.rntop1aintiff .herefn [JIJICI coniirnao the d.isndssal ot t...he st...i.it dv the trjai. Court in inS. NC, 202/ 1. )5.z I have heard the hJICWIietI e.ornsel. for t.he. appellant and peru.sed the orders •of the wrc Court below. P nw opinion, no substantial ciue lfjl of lair arises for detenninaton. Coneurrent. tinc nw No tIJEOCiSU to admit the appear. Appeal dismissed. 01’ JUDGE