The High Court dismissed the first appeal for non-prosecution and non-compliance of office objections. The appellant neither appeared nor complied with previous orders despite multiple opportunities and imposition of costs. The appeal is deleted in its entirety.
The appeal was dismissed for non-appearance and non-compliance of office objections.
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.2138 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
SRI. LAKSHMAN SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE
SMT. KANNIKA, W/O LATE LAKSHMANA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT CHANDRU NILAYA, 2ND CROSS, VINOBHANGARA, SHIMOGA - 577 204.
..APPELLANT
(BY SRI DILIP KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . SMT. KAMALAMMA W/O. LATE. SHIVAPPA, D/O. LATE. HONNAPPA HAVALI, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O. DODDAKERI, HONNALI -577 217. DAVANAGERE DISTRICT
2 . SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O. JAGADEESHAPPA, D/O. LATE HONNAPPA HAVALI,
R.F.A.No.2138/2017
2
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O. NELAHONNE VILLAGE, KUMBLUR POST, HONNALI -577 219, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT
3 . SMT. GALAMMA W/O. LATE. HONNAPA HAVALI, AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS, R/O. DODDAKERI, HONNALI -577 217, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT (SINCE DEAD, THE RESPONDENTS 1, 2 & 4 TO 6 ARE LRS OF GALAMMA) 4 . SMT. KUSUMA W/O. KARIYAPPA KOLLI, D/O. LATE HONNAPAPA HAVALI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O. NELAHONNE VILLAGE, KUMBLUR POST, HONNALI -577 217, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT
5 . SMT. NEELAMMA W/O. LATE. HONNAPPA HAVALI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O. DODDAKERI, HONNALI -577 217 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT
6 . SMT. JAYAMMA W/O. SHANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/O. DODDAKERI, HONNALI -577 217. DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. ..RESPONDENTS
R.F.A.No.2138/2017
3
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.11.2016 PASSED IN O.S.NO.37/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT HARIHARA, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION.
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
Learned counsel for appellant neither present physically nor through video conference.
A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that in this appeal of the year 2017, inspite of granting several and sufficient opportunities, even as final chance and again as a last chance, the appellant has not complied the office objections. After exhausting all those opportunities once again on 01.04.2021, a week's time was granted to comply the office objections imposing cost of Rs.250/- payable to "Karnataka Advocates Clerk's Benevolent Trust" and acknowledgement to that effect to be filed in the registry.
Inspite of it, the appellant neither complied the office objections nor paid cost. No reasons are forthcoming either for non-compliance or non-appearance of the learned counsel for
R.F.A.No.2138/2017
4
appellant. Hence, the appeal stands dismissed for noncompliance of the office objections as well as non-prosecution.
The costs of `250/ordered by this Court on 01.04.2021 can be recovered by the beneficiary thereunder by the execution of the said order as a civil decree.
Sd/JUDGE
SBN
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Kannika
Smt. Kamalamma
Smt. Shanthamma
Smt. Galamma
Smt. Kusuma
Smt. Neelamma
H.B. Prabhakar Sastry
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
