The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a Regular Second Appeal for non-prosecution as the appellant failed to appear despite multiple court notices and summons.
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the absence of the appellant.
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 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.5395 OF 2013 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
SRI GURUBASAVANANDMATH TRUST COMMITTEE GAJENDRAGAD WAS REPRESENTED BY VENKUSA TULAJASA BHANDAGE, AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: CHAIRMAN DEFENDANT’S COMMITTEE, GAJENDRAGAD, R/O. GAJENDRAGAD, TQ: RON-582114.
...APPELLANT
[SRI GURUBASAVANANDMATH TRUST COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (ABSENT)]
AND:
CHAIRMAN, DEVANGA SAMAJA AND SHRI BANASHANKARIDEVI DEVANGMATH TRUST COMMITTEE, GAJENDRAGAD WAS REPRESENTED BY NINGANAGOUDA S/O RUDRAGOUDA GANJI, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND PRESIDENT, PLANTIFF’S COMMITTEE, R/O: GAJENDRAGAD, TALUK: RON-582114.
… RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.L.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 AND ORDER 42 RULES 1 AND 2 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, SET ASIDE THE SAID JUDGMENTS AND DECREE DATED 07.01.2013 PASSED IN
2
R.A. NO. 12/2012 AND JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.04.2012 IN O.S.NO.91/2009 AND FURTHER DISMISS THE SUIT IN O.S.NO.91/2009 FILED BY THE PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
THIS RSA POSTED FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned appeal is listed today for orders regarding Court notice served on the appellant.
Though the name of appellant – Shri Gurubasavanandmath Trust Committee, Gajendragad was called out thrice in the open Court, there is no representation on behalf of appellant either personally or through video conferencing.
As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed on 27.11.2020. On that day counsel Sri.M.C.Bandi., appeared and filed memo for retirement. The same was accepted and counsel Sri.M.C.Bandi., was permitted to retire from the case and Court notice was issued to the appellant.
3
Thereafter, counsel Sri.B.V.Somapur., filed power on behalf of appellant.
Again the appeal was listed on 09.02.2022. On that day, counsel Sri.B.V.Somapura., filed memo for retirement and the same was accepted and Registry was directed to print the name of appellant in the cause list.
The appeal was again listed on 02.03.2022. On that day, emergent Court notice was ordered to be issued to appellant returnable by 28.03.2022.
Thereafter, the appeal was listed on 14.06.2022. On that day, since the Court notice received by the Court stated that one of the Trustees of appellant is dead, the Registry was directed to issue notice to appellant through Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Ron.
The appeal is listed today for orders. The report submitted by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Ron
4
depicts that the notice was served on the Secretary of appellant Trust Committee.
As already noted above, though the name of appellant is called out thrice in the open Court, there is no representation on behalf of appellant either personally or through video conferencing.
Despite giving several opportunities, there is no representation on behalf of appellant. Hence, the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
TKN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Regular Second Appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
Sri Gurubasavanandmath Trust Committee, Gajendragad
Chairman, Devanga Samaja and Shri Banashankaridevi Devangmath Trust Committee, Gajendragad
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
