High Court of Karnataka dismissed a regular second appeal and pending applications for non-prosecution after the appellant died in 2017 without legal representatives complying with objections to come on record.
IA.Nos. 1 and 2 of 2020 dismissed; appeal dismissed for 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:32932 RSA No. 987 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 987 OF 2013 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
GHOUSE PEER S/O.IBRAHIM SAB AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT MAYASANDRA NOW R/AT 2ND CROSS P.H.COLONY
TUMKUR TOWN-572 101
… APPELLANT
SRI HARINATH T.S., ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED APPELLANTS (A) TO (F) IN I.A.NO.1/2017 (ABSENT))
AND:
Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
R-1 & R-3 ARE
R/AT MAYASANDRA VILLAGE & HOBLI
NC: 2023:KHC:32932 RSA No. 987 of 2013
TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 221
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI JAGADEESH MUNDARAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-3)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 23.02.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.10/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TURUVEKERE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.02.2012 PASSED IN OS.NO.61/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TURUVEKERE AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This matter was called out in the morning session. There was no representation on behalf of the appellant.
NC: 2023:KHC:32932 RSA No. 987 of 2013
Registry has raised certain objections on the said application in I.A.No.1/2017. Inspite of the same, learned counsel for appellant has not complied with the same.
"Counsel for appellant is absent. No representation. Compliance to be effected on or before 7/3/2019, otherwise appeal shall stand dismissed."
NC: 2023:KHC:32932 RSA No. 987 of 2013
even now at 2.59 p.m. This goes to show that despite sufficient opportunities being given, the legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant are not interested to come on record and prosecute the appeal. Hence, there is no point in keeping this appeal pending as the original suit is of the year 2006. Therefore, the applications filed to condone the delay in filing recalling application and to recall the order dated 20.02.2019 do not deserve meritorious consideration, as there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. Accordingly, IA.Nos.1 and 2 of 2020 are dismissed.
In view of dismissal of IA.Nos.1 and 2 of 2020 and in terms of the order dated 20.02.2019, the appeal also stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending application, if any, would pale into insignificance.
Sd/JUDGE
LB
GHOUSE PEER S/O IBRAHIM SAB
MUNIYAMMA
MANJUNATH S/O SANNAPUTTAIAH
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
