In RF.A.No.1198 of 2013, the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, by a one-line order, dismissed the civil appeal for non-prosecution as the appellant was absent and had not been served due to inability to trace the address.
The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
R.F.A.No.1198 OF 2013
BETWEEN:
SMT. V SURYAKUMARI W/O SRI J VENUGOPAL AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS OCC:HOUSESHOLD RESIDING AT NO.505, 8TH MAIN SADASHIVANAGAR BANGALORE-560 080 REPRESENTED BY HER SPA HOLDER MR.V.SURYA PRAKASH
...APPELLANT
(SMT.V.SURYA KUMARI-PARTY-IN-PERSON)
AND:
R.F.A.No.1198/2013
2
4TH MAIN ROAD, GOVINDARAJANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 040.
5.BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER KUMARAPARK WEST, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD BANGALORE-560 020. ..RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.N.R.JAGADEESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2, SRI.SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE FOR R-5, SRI.R.S.A.P. ACHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96, R/W, O-41 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED13.03.2013 PASSED IN O.S.NO.2778/2005 ON THE FILE OF XL-ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND MANDATORY INJUNCTION.
R.F.A.No.1198/2013
3
This R.F.A. coming on for Orders, through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R
Appellant called out, has remained absent.
A perusal of the cause list and the order sheet would go to show that, inspite of sending repeated notice to the appellant, the notice has returned unserved as no such person is found in the address.
Learned counsel for the appellant has already retired in this matter on 08.02.2017. Since the subsequent repeated issuance of court notice to the appellant has returned unserved and this court has put all its efforts in sending notice to the appellant and the appellant's present address, after changes if any, is not available to the court, matter cannot be proceeded.
Since the appellant is not appearing in this matter, the appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
SBN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution due to the appellant's absence.
SMT. V SURYAKUMARI
SRI L NAGARAJU
SMT. H K GOWRAMMA
SMT. S SUGUNA
SRI KRISHNA
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
