Karnataka High Court
Sulkisingh S/O Baladevsingh Bawari vs Smt.Kairunnisa W/O Nazeerahmed Khazi on 3 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7338
RSA No. 100332 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100332 OF 2019 (DEC/INJ-)
BETWEEN:
1. SULKISINGH S/O BALADEVSINGH BAWARI
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: HOUSE NO.45/46, SUBHASH,
NAGAR, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI.
2. JWALASINGH S/O BALADEVSINGH BAWARI
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O HOUSE NO. 45/46, SUBHASH
NAGAR, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI GOURISHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. KAIRUNNISA W/O NAZEERAHMED KHAZI
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSE HOLD WORK,
R/O SUBHASH NAGAR, WOLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI.
2. SHRI IMTIYAZ S/O NAZEERAHMED KHAZI
AGE: MAJOR, OCCUPATION: NOT
Digitally signed
KNOWN, R/O SUBHASH NAGAR,
by SAROJA OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI.
HANGARAKI
Location: HIGH 3. SHRI SAMEER S/O NAZEERAHMED KHAZI
COURT OF AGE: MAJOR, OCCUPATION: NOT
KARNATAKA KNOWN, R/O SUBHASH NAGAR,
DHARWAD
BENCH OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI
DHARWAD ...RESPONDENTS
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.11.2018 IN
R.A.NO.117/2017 BY THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC COURT, HUBBALLI, AND ALSO SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED IN O.S.NO.224/2017 BY THE II ADDITIONAL
CIVIL JUDGE AND III JMFC, HUBBALLI AND TO DISMISS THE
COUNTER CLAIM OF THE DEFENDANTS AS PRAYED BY THE
APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS IN THE SUIT, WITH COST THROUGHOUT,
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7338
RSA No. 100332 of 2019
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Vide order dated 20.03.2023, three weeks time was granted to comply with the office objections.
However, since the office objections have not been complied with, this Court vide order dated 13.02.2024 granted a week's time on payment of costs of Rs.1,000/-.
Though sufficient time was granted, neither the cost has been paid nor the office objections have been complied with.
In view of the same, the above appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE SVH CT:GSM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 330