The Karnataka High Court dismissed an appeal filed under Section 96/Order XLI Rule 1 CPC for non-prosecution and failure to comply with court objections, noting the appellants did not appear despite multiple notices and a granted extension.
The appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of office objections and 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 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
R.F.A.No.1656 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
..APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.VISHNU HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
G.S. SURESH KUMAR, SINCE DEAD BY LRS
RFA No. 1656/2018
2
G.R. SRIKANTAPPA … DEAD (LRS ARE PLAINTIFF NO.1 TO 2 (c)]
SRI G. THOTADAPPA, S/O OF LATE G. CHANNA SOMANNA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRs.
SMT. T. N. SUSHEELAMMA, W/O LATE G. THOTADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU-560 004. (DEAD - NO LRs).
RFA No. 1656/2018
3
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BENGALURU -560 086.
ALSO AT OLD NO.50 NEW NO.50/5, 2ND MAIN, 3RD CROSS, RMC YARD, YESHWANTHAPURA DIVISION, NO.8, BENGALURU-560 022.
..RESPONDENTS
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.04.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.2769/1990, ON THE FILE OF THE XXII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH NO.7), DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION, DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND ALLOWING THE COUNTER CLAIM RESPONDENT NO. 3 HEREIN.
This R.F.A. coming on for Orders, through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made the following :
RFA No. 1656/2018
4
O R D E R
None appeared for the appellants either physically in the Court or through video conference. No reasons are forthcoming for non-appearance of the learned counsel for the appellants.
that in this appeal of the year 2018, in spite of granting several and sufficient opportunities of not less than four times, the appellants have not complied the office objections.
week's time, as a last chance, after imposing a cost of `500/- payable to the Karnataka Advocates Clerks' Benevolent Trust and filing an acknowledgement to that effect in the registry. Inspite of the same, the appellants have neither complied the office objections nor paid the cost nor even shown any reasons for their non-appearance in this matter and also for non-compliance.
RFA No. 1656/2018
5
As such, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-
compliance of office objections as well for non-prosecution.
However, the beneficiary of the cost i.e., the Karnataka Advocates Clerks' Benevolent Trust, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru is at liberty to enforce the said order dated 21.04.2021 as a civil decree for its execution in the manner known to law before the competent Court.
Registry to transmit a copy of this order to the Karnataka Advocates Clerks' Benevolent Trust, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru, forthwith for its information.
Sd/JUDGE
MBB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution and failure to comply with court objections despite multiple opportunities.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
G.S. CHAYADEVI
G.S. ASHADEVI
LATHA SURESH
G.S. HARSHITHA
G.R. SRIKANTAPPA
H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
