Smt.Megha W/O Abhishek Kulkarni v. Abhishek Kulkarni S/O Ashok Kulkarni
Case brief
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED…
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED…
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
R.P.F.C. NO.100026 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI K.S. KORISHETTAR, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
AND:
ABHISHEK KULKARNI S/O ASHOK KULKARNI AGE:40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: NO.39/A, 19TH "D" MAIN ROAD, 1ST BLOCK, RAJAJI NAGAR, BANGALURU-560 010.
…RESPONDENT
2
THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SECTION 19(2) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN CRL.MISC. NO. 23/2015, DATED 11.11.2019, PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND CALL FOR RECORDS.
THIS RPFC POSTED FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
There is no representation on behalf of petitioners.
As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the matter
was listed on 17.10.2022. On that day, at request on behalf of learned counsel for petitioners, two weeks time was granted to comply office objections, failing which the petition was ordered to be listed for dismissal on 04.11.2022.
The Revision Petition is listed today. So far office objections are not complied with.
As already noted above, there is no representation on
behalf of petitioners and in view of earlier peremptory order
3
dated:17.10.2022, the Regular Second appeal is dismissed
for non-compliance of office objections and also for non-
prosecution .
Sd/JUDGE
TKN
Smt. Megha W/o Abhishek Kulkarni & Another
Abhishek Kulkarni
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court