In this regular second appeal, the High Court of Karnataka dismissed the appeal pursuant to counsel's submission that the appellant failed to pay the court fee despite notice.
The appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of office objections and non-payment of Court fee.
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 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1941 OF 2021 (RES)
BETWEEN:
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI VISHNU, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENT
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.03.2021 PASSED IN R.A.NO.258/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AND CJM, MANGALURU, D.K, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.11.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.573/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, MANGALURU, D.K.
NC: 2023:KHC:30757 RSA No. 1941 of 2021
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the client
is not responding to pay the Court fee, inspite of the same being intimated. Hence, it is clear that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the matter by making good the Court fee.
appellant is placed on record.
compliance of office objections and non-payment of Court fee.
Sd/JUDGE
ST
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33
1 provisions across 1 enactments
ANIL K. KEMBAR
K. PUSHPARAJ SHETTY
H.P.SANDESH
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
