Dismissed¶¶21

Smt Shyamala v. Smt M N Nagaveni

Karnataka HC13 Jan 2025RFA/76/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC Bengaluru (NC 2025:KHC:1190), RFA No. 76 of 2023 (POS), Jyoti Mulimani J., 13.01.2025: Regular First Appeal under S.96 CPC dismissed for non-prosecution and non-compliance of office objections after peremptory order dated 06.01.2025; appellant Shyamala unrepresented and did not clear office objections despite a week's time. Procedural value only (office-objection defaults, peremptory orders); no merits decided, no precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution and for non-compliance of office objections, the appellant having failed to comply with the office objections despite sufficient time and being unrepresented, in view of the peremptory order dated 06.01.2025. ¶¶21

Smt Shyamala Vs Smt M N Nagaveni — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:1190 RFA No. 76 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

¶6

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 76 OF 2023 (POS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT.SHYAMALA W/O SEETHARAM, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, (R/AT NO.24 (29/640/24), SITED AT EAST SANJIVINI NAGAR, HEGGANAHALLI CROSS, BENGALURU-560 091.

¶9

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. KESHAVA MURTHY.B., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SMT. M.N.NAGAVENI W/O M.H.MOHAN, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.48, 2^ND CROSS, LAKSHMANAGAR, SANJIVINI NAGAR, HEGGANAHALLI CROSS, VISHWANEEDAM (PO), BENGALURU-560 091. (BY SRI. GANGADHARAIAH.A.N., ADVOCATE C/R)

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CPC, 1908.

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:1190 RFA No. 76 of 2023

¶18

ORAL ORDER

¶19

When the case is called, the appellant is not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case.

¶20

As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed on 06.01.2025, on that day, when the case was called, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant. However, finally a week’s time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which the office was directed to list the appeal under the caption ‘for dismissal of appeal for noncompliance of office objections’.

¶21

The appeal is listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of office objections’. Despite granting sufficient time, the appellant has not complied with the office objections. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. In view of peremptory order dated 06.01.2025, the appeal is dismissed for nonprosecution and also for non-compliance of office objections.

¶22

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶23

TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

Smt Shyamala v. Smt M N Nagaveni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Shyamala v. Smt M N Nagaveni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. N Nagaraj Vs Smt. Jayalakshmi

Karnataka Slum Development Board Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ashok C Nilugal Vs State of Karnataka

Smt M S Chandra Thara Vs Smt. D.G. Shobhavathi

M/S Gangothri Consumer Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Sigandhooru Chowdeshwari Harijanagirijana Vs the State of Karnataka