Raghavendra Vs Raghu — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Raghavendra Vs Raghu — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Final opportunity of two weeks, on payment of Rs.1,000/- cost at the Registry, to comply with the office objections; on failure the appeal was to stand dismissed without reference to the Bench. The Note records that the office objections were not complied with and the appeal accordingly stood dismissed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the 17 office objections raised on filing of the appeal had been complied with, and whether counsel was pursuing the matter diligently. +1 more

Court's answer

On perusal of the order sheet, 17 office objections existed and none had been complied with since the date of filing; counsel was not pursuing the matter diligently.

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, a cost of Rs.1,000/- payable at the Registry within two weeks was imposed and two weeks' time granted to comply with the office objections.

Key takeaways

If the office objections are not complied with and the cost is not paid within two weeks, the appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Bench.ratio¶95

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular Second Appeal No. 1370/2024 under Section 100 CPC by Raghavendra against Raghu and eleven other respondents, challenging the judgment and decree dated 10.11.2023 in RA No.3/2019 (Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Belur), which had dismissed the first appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree dated 02.01.2019 in OS No. 147/2009 (C/C Civil Judge and JMFC, Bellur). The appeal, filed on 17.09.2024, carried 17 office objections, none of which were complied with despite successive opportunities before the Registrar on 25.09.2024, 03.12.2024 and 10.02.2025. H.P. Sandesh, J., finding that counsel was not pursuing the matter diligently, imposed a cost of Rs.1,000/- payable at the Registry and granted a final period of two weeks to comply, directing that on failure the appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Bench. The Note records that the office objections were not complied with and the appeal accordingly stood dismissed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 06^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE

THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1370 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

RAGHAVENDRA

S/O LATE RAMASHETTY

AGED ABOUT 41YEARS

R/AT GANIGARA STREET,

BELUR, HASSAN-573115

...APPELLANT/S

(By Sri./Smt: RAJ PRABHU S., S.M.BELWATAGI AND VENKATESH, ADVOCATES)

AND:

RAGHU

S/O LATE RAMASHETTY

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

R/AT NO 10/2, 1^ST CROSS

VENKATAMMA BUILDING

NEAR VENAKTESHWARA TEMPLE

GORAGUNTEPALYA

BANGALORE-22

2. DIVAKARA

S/O LATE RAMASHETTY

…2

2

RSA NO. 1370/2024

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

R/AT NO 10/2, 1^ST CROSS VENKATAMMA BUILDING

NEAR VENKATESHWARA TEMPLE GORAGUNTEPALYA BANGALORE-22

CHAYAPATHI

S/O LATE RAMSHETTY

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

R/AT SHIVAJYOTHI PANA STREET PETE, BELUR

JIVARAJ

S/O LATE RAJASHETTY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

R/AT NO 10/2

1^ST CROSS

VENKATAMMA BUILDING

NEAR VENKATESHWARA TEMPLE

GORAGUNTEPLAYA

BANGALORE-22

MADAN

S/O LATE RAMSHETTY

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/O SHIVAJYOTHI PANA STREET

PETE BELUR

…3

3

RSA NO. 1370/2024

HE IS ABNORMAL

REPRESENTED BY HIS SISTER

9^TH REPSONDENT SHUBHA

6. PANKAJA

D/O LATE RAMASHETTY, W/O KANNAIAH K.P, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

R/AT DOOR NO. 108,

OPPOSITE S.M.S TOWNSHIP ASHRAMA STAND, BINNAMANGALA,

NELAMANGALA RURAL TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

7. SUDHA

D/O LATE RAMASHETTY,

W/O PRASANNAKUMAR,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

R/AT DOOR NO.806, B.M. SHAKARAPPA LAYOUT, 1^ST CROSS, K.N. EXTENSION, TIPATURU

VINODHA

D/O LATE RAMASHETTY,

W/O SOMASHEKARA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, C/O H.V. THIMAPPASHETTY,

…4

RSA NO. 1370/2024

4

NASHE BUSINESS,

G.L.B. ROAD, HUNASURU.

9. SHUBHA

D/O LATE RAMASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O SHIVAJYOTHI PANA STREET, PETE, BELUR

BHAVYA

D/O LATE RAMASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.111, KRISHNA KUTIRA, TANISANDRA, BANGALORE-45

SHARADAMMA

W/O LATE RAMASHETTY,

AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,

R/O SHIVAJYOTHI PANA STREET, PETE, BELUR

12. L.NAGARATHNA

W/O ESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

R/AT 3^RD CROSS,

DURGIGUDI HONNALI, DAVANAGERE.

…RESPONDENT/S

…5

RSA NO. 1370/2024

5

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.11.2023 PASSED IN RA No.3/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BELUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.01.2019 PASSED IN OS No. 147/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE C/C CIVIL JUDGE, AND JMFC, BELLUR.

This Regular Second Appeal coming on for Orders, this day the Court made the following Order.

ORAL ORDER

This appeal was filed on 17.09.2024 and office has raised

the objections and matter was listed before the Registrar on 25.09.2024 for compliance of office objection, learned counsel was absent and three weeks time was granted for compliance of office objections and also made it clear that in the event of noncompliance of office objections within three weeks from today, post the matter before the undersigned. Accordingly, matter was listed before the Registrar on 03.12.2024, again counsel was absent, finally one week time was granted and similar order was passed and once again matter was listed before the Registrar on

…6

6

RSA NO. 1370/2024

10.02.2025 and counsel was present and made the submission that he will comply with the office objections during the course of the day and office objections are not complied. Hence, an order was passed to post the matter before the Court. Hence, matter is posted before this Court.

Having perused the order sheet, there are 17 office objections and none of the office objections are complied from the date of filing of this appeal. Hence, it is very clear that counsel is not pursuing the matter diligently. Therefore, on cost of Rs.1,000/- payable at Registry within two weeks, two weeks time is granted to comply with the office objections.

If the office objections are not complied and cost is not paid within two weeks, the appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Bench.

Sd/JUDGE

…7

RSA NO. 1370/2024

7

NOTE : Vide Court Order dated 06.06.2025, office objections

are not complied with, hence appeal shall stand dismissed.

COPY

Sd/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

T By : SR R By : RG C By : GS Ty Dt : 19.07.2025 C.Dt : 21.07.2025