The High Court dismissed a regular first appeal as per incuriam for non-prosecution. The appellant was absent on multiple listings, and no representation was filed despite repeated chances.
The appeal was dismissed for default due to non-prosecution and absence of the appellant.
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-D:6153 RFA No. 100067 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G.UMA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100067/2019(DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
SMT. LAXMIBAI W/O. SHIVAPPA GOLAPPAGOL, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: INGALAGI – 587 313, TALUKA: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE.
…APPELLANT
(BY SMT. S.V. DESHAPANDE AND SRI ABHISHEK PATIL, ADVOCATES)
AND:
Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: High Court of Karnataka
S/O. SHIVALINGAPPA DYAVANNAVAR @ DEVINNANAVAR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: INGALAGI – 587 313, TQ: MUDHOL,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., 1908, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.10.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.11/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, MUDHOL AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. No
representation, inspite of the matter passed over twice in the morning and again called at 2.45 pm.
several objections. The appeal is listed for 6th time for compliance of office objections. Till today, office objections are not complied with. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
non-prosecution.
SD/JUDGE
PN/CT-ASC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 94
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the regular first appeal should be dismissed for want of appearance and non-proof of cause of absence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SMT. LAXMIBAI W/O. SHIVAPPA GOLAPPAGOL
SMT. SUNANDA W/O. RAMAPPA DYAVANNAVAR @ DEVINNANAVAR
SHRI.VIRUPAXI S/O. SHIVALINGAPPA DYAVANNAVAR @ DEVINNANAVAR
SMT. BOURAWWA W/O SHIVALINGAPPA DYAVANNAVAR @ DEVINNANAVAR
SHRI RUDRAPPA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA DYAVANNAVAR @ DEVINNANAVAR
M.G.UMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
