Dismissed

Abhishek S B Maiya, v. Archana W/O. Abhishek S B Maiya

Karnataka HC22 Sept 2012MFA/26004/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Dharwad dismissed an appeal filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 CPC against a matrimonial decree. The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution and failure to rectify office objections within the statutory period and subsequent extensions despite multiple reminders.

What did the court decide?

Appeal filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 CPC dismissed for non-prosecution and non-compliance with previous orders.

Abhishek S B Maiya, Vs Archana W/O. Abhishek S B… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD.

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.PATIL

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.V.PINTO

¶8

MFA NO.26004/2011(MC)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SHRI.ABHISHEK S.B. MAYYA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PROPRIETOR, MOHAN MOTORS, RESIDING AT NO.921, DHALAVI BUILDING, HABBUWADA, TALUK KARWAR, KARWAR DISTRICT.

¶11

… APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI.I.P.MOSES, ADV.)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SMT.ARCHANA WIFE OF ABHISHEK S.B. MAYYA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE, RESIDING AT C/O V.S.KATTI, M.S.E.B. COLONY, VISHRAM BHAAG, SANGLI, DIST: SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA STATE.

¶15

… RESPONDENT

¶16

¶17

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLIII RULE 1 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.09.2011 PASSED IN MATRIMONIAL CASE NO.14/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AT KARWAR, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(I-B) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.

¶18

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, N.K.PATIL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal has been filed on 16.12.2011. Even after

¶21

expiry of statutory period of six weeks, office objections have not been rectified nor removed nor needful has been done.

¶22

When, this matter came up before the Court on 27.03.2012, as a last chance, four weeks’ time was granted to do the needful, failing which, appeal would stand dismissed without reference to the Court. Again the matter came up before the Court on 14.06.2012 and the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. There was no representation for the appellant and the appellant has not complied with the order dated 27.03.2012. However, even he is not taken any steps to do the needful and to file

¶23

¶24

necessary application for recalling the order dated 27.03.2012. But he filed the application for recalling the order dated 14.06.2012 and that too without application of mind, has filed only one set of papers. It shows beyond reasonable doubt that, neither the appellant nor the counsel appearing for the appellant is diligent to prosecute the case, since 16.12.2011 till as on date.

¶25

Taking all these factors referred to above, appeal filed by the appellant stands dismissed for noncompliance of order dated 28.08.2012.

¶26

Sd/JUDGE

¶27

Sd/JUDGE

¶28

MBS/-

Abhishek S B Maiya, v. Archana W/O. Abhishek S B Maiya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek S B Maiya, v. Archana W/O. Abhishek S B Maiya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ullas S/O Anant Badakarf Vs the Director of Treasuries

Basavaraj S/O Ishwarappa Gurikar Vs Budnesaab S/O Dastagirsab Kallimani

M Mallikarjun S/O. Bheemanna Vs the Divisional Controller

North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs Rajashekar

Smt. Vaishali W/O Mahesh Khedekar, Vs Sri. Balasaheb S/O Krishna Valvekar

Mahesh S/O Satteppa Choudannavar, Vs Atul S/O Ashok Mehta