An appellant failed to comply with office objections on a 2023 appeal and made no representation when the matter was repeatedly listed for dismissal; the appeal was 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: 2024:KHC:35687 MFA No. 5250 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5250 OF 2023 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
MR. SURESH M.A S/O LATE ASHWATHANARAYANA M.C. AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.154/27, 2ND ‘D’ CROSS, NAGENDRA BLOCK, BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 026.
…APPELLANT
(BY SMT.SUMATHI S., ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
AND:
Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ALL ARE R/AT NO. 154/27, 2ND ‘D’ CROSS, NAGENDRA BLOCK, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 026.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.NARAYANASWAMY T.N., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)
NC: 2024:KHC:35687 MFA No. 5250 of 2023
THIS MFA FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(s) R/W SEC.151 OF CPC, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED: 22.06.2023 PASSED ON IA IN OS.NO.5454/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, FILED U/O.40 RULE 1 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
ORAL JUDGMENT
On 06.12.2023, two weeks time was granted to comply
with the office objections. When this matter came up on 30.08.2024, as there was no representation on behalf of both the parties, the matter was directed to be listed for 'dismissal' on 31.08.2024 at 4:30 p.m. Again on 31.08.2024, this matter was directed to be listed for 'dismissal' on 02.09.2024 at 2:30 p.m. Today, when the matter came up before this Court, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant and in an appeal of the year 2023, so far office objections are not complied with. It appears that the appellant is not interested to pursue the matter.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-
prosecution .
SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
MEG/List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1
1 issue framed by the court
Should the appeal filed under Order XLIII Rule 1(s) CPC be dismissed for non-prosecution given failure to comply with office objections?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Suresh M.A
Nirmal Kumar M.H
Balarama M.A.
M.A. Rajamani
Vinutha M.A.
Lalitha Kanneganti
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
