Partly allowed

Irani Zafrulla Khan v. Sri Hyder Ali Khan

Karnataka HC4 Dec 2021RFA/1358/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka converted a Regular First Appeal into a Regular Second Appeal upon payment of a cost of Rs. 5,000. The conversion is granted subject to the Registry undertaking further scrutiny if required.

What did the court decide?

Conversion of Regular First Appeal into Regular Second Appeal granted conditionally upon payment of Rs. 5,000 cost and filing of compliance memo within three weeks.

Irani Zafrulla Khan Vs Sri Hyder Ali Khan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 4^th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

¶5

R.F.A.No.1358 OF 2016

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

IRANI ZAFRULLA KHAN, S/O LATE IRANI NAZRULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, FRUIT MERCHANT, R/O K.T.J. NAGAR, 5^TH CROSS, 2^ND MAIN, DOOR NO. 1167, DAVANAGERE. ..APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI.AMSHITH HEGDE H.S., ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

SRI HYDER ALI KHAN, S/O ABDULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, FRUIT MERCHANT, HOLEHUNNU ROAD, R/O BELOW STATE BANK OF MYSORE, BHADRAVATHI.

¶11

B.P. RUDREGOWDA,

¶12

S/O THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, BHIMNERE, SANTHE BENNUR HOBLI, R/O HOSAMANE EXTENSION,

RFA No.1358/2016

SHIVAMOGGA.

GADIGEMMA,

¶17

W/O BASAVANAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/O THIMMUNAKATTE TOWN & POST, RANEBENNUR TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT. ..RESPONDENTS

¶18

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.03.2016 PASSED IN R.A. NO. 128/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, SHIVAMOGGA DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.05.2013 PASSED IN FR. NO.O.S./0000332/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIVAMOGGA ACCEPTING THE OFFICE NOTE SUBMITTED BY THE C.M.O.

¶19

This R.F.A. coming on for Orders, through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made the following :

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Learned counsel for the appellant is physically present in the Court and he has filed a Memo seeking conversion of the Regular First Appeal into Regular Second Appeal.

¶22

The objections regarding the maintainability of

¶23

this matter as a Regular First Appeal was raised by the office as long back as in the year 2016. Thereafter, on

¶24

RFA No.1358/2016

¶25

¶26

several dates of hearing, the matter was listed before the Court, despite which the appellant had not taken any remedial steps in the matter. It is only after five years, he is coming up with the present Memo seeking conversion. This is nothing but improper use of precious time of the Court for no valid reasons. As such, though the Memo for conversion as prayed is granted, but the same would be on payment of cost. Accordingly, imposing a cost of `5,000/payable by the appellant to the Legal Services Committee of this Court, within three weeks from today and filing a compliance memo along with receipt in the registry, the conversion as sought for is granted.

¶27

Registry to convert this Regular First Appeal into Regular Second Appeal, however, subject to further scrutiny, if required.

¶28

MBB

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

Irani Zafrulla Khan v. Sri Hyder Ali Khan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irani Zafrulla Khan v. Sri Hyder Ali Khan

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

Sri. Basavaraj v. Mundasd Vs Sri. Veerupaksha H M

Sri Shanthakumar Vs Smt Sumangala @

M/S Arpithadeepam Vs M/S Apex Silks

Sri. P.K. Jagannatha Rao Vs Sri. Muralidhar Bhat

Anil S/O Venkappa Kushalkar Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Kapila Saigal Vs M/S Gajanana Enterprises