This judgment dismisses a regular first appeal filed for non-prosecution due to the non-appearance of the appellant's counsel and non-compliance with office objections despite multiple opportunities.
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.
RFA No. 552 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 552 OF 2020 (INJ)
Between:
Digitally signed by BHARATHIDEVI K KORLAHALLI Location: High Court of Karnataka
All are residing at No.161, Ews Quarters, 2nd Stage, 1st Main Road, 8th Cross, Kengeri Upanagara, Bengaluru-560 060 Also R/o. No.12, Shamanna Layout, 4th Cross, 12th Main Road, Jougupalya, Bengaluru - 560 008. …Appellants (By Sri. Ramakrishna M, Advocate)
RFA No. 552 of 2020
And:
(b) Kavya Aged 18 Years, D/o Late Shankar,
(c) Mithun Aged 15 Years, S/o Late Shankar,
All are residing at No.12, Samanna Layout, 4th Main, 2nd Cross, Jougupalya, Ulsoor, Bengaluru-560 008.
2 Sri.Gajendra Aged about 63 years, S/o Late Appappa Chetty, R/At No.161, Ews Quarters, 2nd Stage, 1st Main Road, 8th Cross, Kengeri Upanagaa, Bengaluru - 560 060.
…Respondents
This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to call for the records and set aside the judgment and decree dated 15.10.2019, passed in OS.No.26550/2011 on the file of the Hon’ble XXVI Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-20), by allowing the
RFA No. 552 of 2020
appeal with costs and grant such other relief/s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
This Regular First Appeal coming on for Orders through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the appellants is neither present physically nor through Video Conference. No reasons are forthcoming either for non-compliance of office objections or for non-appearance of the learned counsel for the appellants.
in this appeal of the year 2020, in spite of granting sufficient opportunities of not less than four times, the appellants have not complied the office objections. The office objections which are due for compliance are too simple and trivial in nature like mentioning the present age of the parties, mentioning the valuation of the appeal, attesting the signature of the Executants of Vakalath, showing the names of the Executants of Vakalath below
RFA No. 552 of 2020
their signature. For these simple office objections, learned counsel for the appellants is taking enormous time.
Further, he has also remained absent without showing the reasons for his non-appearance.
Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed for
non-compliance of office objections, as well as for non-prosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
bk/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50
Smt. Muniyamma and others
Sri R Shankar and others
Sri.Gajendra
H.B.Prabhakara Swamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
