The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a regular first appeal filed under Section 96 CPC. The appellant failed to appear and did not comply with previous court orders requiring compliance of office objections.
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.
NC: 2023:KHC:19660 RFA No. 1287 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1287 OF 2020 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
N H PUTTANARASEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O LATE HONNAPPA, NANDIHALLI VILLAGE, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT-572101.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. G S PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by BHARATHIDEVI K KORLAHALLI Location: High Court of Karnataka
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, S/O LAKSHMINARASAIAH, SURGEON, RAJALAKSHMI NURSING HOME, OPP SIT COLLEGE, TUMAKURU-572101.
…RESPONDENTS
NC: 2023:KHC:19660 RFA No. 1287 of 2020
RFA FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.11.2018 PASSED IN OS.NO.15/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., TUMAKURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND DECLARATION.
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCE, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING :
ORDER
Learned counsel for the appellant is neither present physically nor through Video Conference. No reasons are forthcoming for his non-appearance.
“At the request of learned counsel for the appellant, who is appearing through Video Conference, as a final opportunity, a week’s time as prayed is granted to comply the office objections, failing which, the Court may proceed to pass appropriate orders, including dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance of office objections.
In case, if the office objections are not complied with in their entirety within the said time, registry to list the matter on 05.06.2023.”
NC: 2023:KHC:19660 RFA No. 1287 of 2020
In spite of the above, the learned counsel for the appellant has neither complied the office objections nor shown any reasons for non-compliance of office objections and not even appeared in this matter. The appeal is of the year 2020 and several and sufficient opportunities for not less than three times have also been granted to him. As such, I do not find any further reason to grant some more time.
Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed
non-compliance of office objections, as well as for non-prosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
bk/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal filed under Section 96 CPC should be allowed when the appellant fails to comply with office objections and does not appear.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
N H PUTTANARASEGOWDA
L NARENDRA KUMAR
L NAGESH
N P LAKSHMINARASAIAH
H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
