Regular second appeal dismissed for non-prosecution after repeated absence of appellants' counsel on multiple hearing dates, despite prior restoration following earlier dismissal 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 957 OF 2016 (DEC)
BETWEEN:
… APPELLANTS
(BY SRI PRAMOD K., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
Digitally signed by B AND: LAVANYA DR.KAMATH B.N.N. Location: S/O.KAMATH B.N.A. HIGH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS COURT OF R/AT NO.2704, 3RD CROSS KARNATAKA GANDHINAGAR MANDYA CITY-571 401
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI C.SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
NC: 2024:KHC:8113 RSA No. 957 of 2016
AND DECREE DATED 15.03.2016 PASSED IN R.A.NO.68/2012 BY V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN AND ALSO THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.03.2012 PASSED IN O.S.NO.43/2004 BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARASIKERE AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
There is no representation on behalf of the
appellants.
respondent is present before the Court.
also, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants. On 02.02.2024 also, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants. However, learned counsel for respondent was present and the matter was posted to 20.02.2024 by providing one more opportunity to the learned counsel for appellants to address his arguments. Today also, when the matter is called-out at 4.10 p.m., again, there is no representation on behalf of the appellants.
NC: 2024:KHC:8113 RSA No. 957 of 2016
to be dismissed for non-prosecution. Despite the said order being recalled and the matter being restored to file at the instance of the appellants, it appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the matter further.
In view of the above, left with no other option, this appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending
interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and the same pales into insignificance.
Sd/JUDGE
LB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SRI P.B.HEMACHANDRA
SMT.NEELAMMA
DR.KAMATH B.N.N.
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
