Dismissed¶27

S. N. Eswari Prasad v. Smt. Satvinder Mohana Ramana

Karnataka HC17 Jan 2025RFA/1271/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka (Jyoti Mulimani, J.), 17.01.2025 — RFA No. 1271 of 2023 (MON) dismissed for non-prosecution; appellant S.N.Eswari Prasad absent despite thrice being called, no representation; Section 96 CPC, 1908; corrected by chambers order dated 07.02.2025.

What did the court decide?

The appellant, absent despite being called out thrice and unrepresented after counsel's retirement, was found not diligent in prosecuting the appeal; accordingly, the Regular First Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. ¶26

S. N. Eswari Prasad Vs Smt. Satvinder Mohana Ramana — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:1988 RFA No. 1271 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1271 OF 2023 (MON)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

S.N.ESWARI PRASAD AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT MR 31, BTM LAYOUT, 2^ND STAGE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 076.

…APPELLANT

(ABSENT)

AND:

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SMT. SATVINDER MOHANA RAMANA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, W/O SRIMOHANA RAMANA, PRESENTLY RESIDING ATH NO.147, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, PRIDE VALLEY LAYOUT, BUKKASAGARA VILLAGE, ANEKAL TALUK, JIGANI HOBLI, BENGALURU-83. REPRESENTED BY HER REPRESENTATIVE.

¶13

SRI MOHANA RAMANA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING ATH NO.147, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, PRIDE VALLEY LAYOUT, BUKKASAGARA VILLAGE, ANEKAL TALUK, JIGANI HOBLI, BENGALURU-83. REPRESENTED BY HER REPRESENTATIVE.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

¶15

96 OF CPC, 1908.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:1988 RFA No. 1271 of 2023

¶18

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

The name of the appellant is called out thrice in the open Court, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant either personally or through video conferencing. The appellant is absent.

¶21

As could be seen from the appeal papers, the appellant was represented by counsel Sri.Deepak., He was permitted to retire from the case and the office was directed to print the name of the appellant in the cause list and the appeal was ordered to be listed on 17.01.2025.

¶22

The appeal is listed today by showing the name of the appellant in the cause list.

¶23

As could be seen from the appeal papers, the appeal is filed in the year 2023. Now we are in the month of January 2025. The appeal is pending for almost two years. As already noted above, the name of the appellant is called out thrice in the open Court. There is no representation on behalf of the appellant either personally or through video conferencing. The

¶24

¶25

NC: 2025:KHC:1988 RFA No. 1271 of 2023

¶26

appellant is absent. It appears that the appellant is not diligent in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular First* Appeal is

¶27

dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶28

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶29

MRP

¶30