Regular first appeal against a decree for partition and separate possession was dismissed for non-prosecution after steps were not taken for notices and paper books were not filed.
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 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2053 OF 2017 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
MR. TITTO D'SOUZA S/O LATE A M D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO.215, 54TH CROSS, 4TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NAYAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DINESH RAO N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
RESPONDENTS NO.6 & 7 ARE RESIDENTS OF "MAY FLOWER", NEAR FALNIR POST OFFICE, KAPRIGODDA, MANGALORE - 575 006.
MR. ROSHAN D'SOUZA, S/O LATE VINCENT D'SOUZA A, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
(DEFENDANT NO.5 HAD DIED DURING THE PENDENCY OF SUIT WITHOUT LEAVING AND LEGAL HEIRS AND HE WAS UNMARRIED)
RESPONDENT NO.10 IS RESIDENT OF NO.06, KHB COLONY, BASAVESHWARANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 079.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRABHAKARA L. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3, R4 AND R5; SRI. SWARUPA G.P, ADVOCATE FOR R10 VIDE ORDER DATED 12.09.2024, APPEAL AGAINST R1, R2, R6 AND R9 IS DISMISSED;
R7 AND R8 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS RFA IS FILED U/O 41 RULE 1 OF CPC, R/W SEC.96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.10.2017 PASSED IN O.S.NO.8066/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE XXX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION & SEPARATE POSSESSION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
NC: 2024:KHC:37488 RFA No. 2053 of 2017
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
ORAL ORDER
Despite granting sufficient time, proper steps are not taken for issue of notice to respondent No.6. Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed as against respondent No.6 so also in respect of deceased respondent Nos.1,2 and 9, proper steps are not taken till today. Accordingly, appeal against them also stands dismissed.
Paper books are not filed despite granting six years time. Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed for non prosecution.
Sd/(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE
KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3 CT: BHK
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Titto D'Souza
Nicholas D'Souza
Clementine John
Julian D'Souza
Jecintha D'Souza
Arthur D'Souza
V Srishananda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
