Regular second appeal dismissed for non-compliance with office objections outstanding since 2019, after a previous dismissal was recalled and delay condoned subject to costs.
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:44535 RSA No. 528 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 528 OF 2019 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
SRI. R.SRINIVAS S/O RAMANNA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT VOKKALERI VILLAGE AND POST, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR-563 130.
…APPELLANT
(BY SMT. SUMA.Y., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.S.BADARI NARAYANA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka
NC: 2024:KHC:44535 RSA No. 528 of 2019
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT BEHIND PADMAVATHI KALYANAMANDAPAM, SHIVAJINAGARA, MANDANAPALLI TOWN, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-517 001.
THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 10 AND 16 ARE RESIDING AT VOKKALERI VILLAGE AND POST, KOLAR TALUK-563 130.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.
NC: 2024:KHC:44535 RSA No. 528 of 2019
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Smt.Suma.Y., counsel on behalf of Sri.M.S.Badari Narayana., for the appellant has appeared in person and submits that short accommodation may be granted to comply with the office objections.
This Court is not inclined to grant time. The reason is plain. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed on 07.10.2021, on that day, finally, three week's time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which, the appeal would be dismissed without reference to the Bench. Despite granting time the office objections were not complied with. In view of peremptory order, the appeal was dismissed. Accordingly, an application in I.A.No.1/2024 is filed to condone the delay of 838 days in filing the application and to recall the order of dismissal dated:07.10.2021. This Court vide order dated:06.08.2024 had condoned the delay and the order dated:07.10.2021 was recalled and restored to file subject to appellant depositing Rs.3,000/- to the Advocate's Library Association within two weeks from the date of the order.
NC: 2024:KHC:44535 RSA No. 528 of 2019
Furthermore, the office has raised objections at the scrutiny stage back in the year 2019. Now we are in the month of November 2024. It's been five years, the objections raised at
the stage of scrutiny are not complied with as of today. It appears that the appellant is not diligent in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.
Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE
MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R.Srinivas
Markondappa
Ramanna @ Doddappaiah
Krishnappa @ Doddappaiah
Gopalappa
Venkatamma
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
