Smt Shameemunissa vs Sri P M Abdul Kareem S/O Mohammed ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5866 Kant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                             BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

                    R.F.A.No.1918 OF 2006

BETWEEN:

1. Smt. Shameemunissa,
   W/o. Late Syed Akber, Major

2. Sri. Syed Almas Pasha,
   Aged about 31 years

3. Baby Ayesha Tabasum
   Aged about 30 years.

4. Baby Humera Tabasum,
   Aged about 25 years.

5.   Baby Sumeria Tabasum
     Aged about 28 years.

6.   Baby Tasmiya
     Aged about 24 years.

7.   Master Syed Aleem Pasha
     Aged about 22 years,

All are residing at Hanifia Masjid Road,
Kushalnagar, Kadugondanahalli,
Arabic College Post,
Bangalore. 560 045.
                                            ...Appellants
(By Sri. Rahamathulla Shariff &
Sri. C.S. Girish Kumar, Advocates)
                                               R.F.A.No.1918/2006

                                2



AND:

Sri. P.M. Abdul Kareem,
S/o. Mohammed Ismail,
Aged Major, residing at Perumal
Compound, 2nd Cross, Bilalnagar,
Arabic College Post,
Bangalore - 560 045.
                                             ...Respondent
(By Sri.H.B. Udaykumar & Associates )

                              ****
      This R.F.A. is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, praying to allow the appeal and set aside the
judgment and decree dated 13-06-2006 passed by the XIII
Additional City Civil Judge at Mayohall Unit, Bangalore in
O.S.No.10644/1997, in the interest of justice and equity.

     This R.F.A. coming on for Hearing, through Physical
Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made
the following:

                           ORDER

None appear in this matter either physically or through

video conference. No reasons are forthcoming for their non-

appearance.

2. A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that, in

this appeal of the year 2006, in spite of granting several and

sufficient opportunities, the learned counsels for the parties have

not appeared and addressed their arguments.

R.F.A.No.1918/2006

3. On 21-09-2021, after calling the matter in three rounds

and noticing the absence of the learned counsel for the

appellants, this Court, in its observation, has made it clear that,

the appeal is of the year 2006 and in case the learned counsel

for the appellants does not appear on the next date of hearing,

the matter would be dismissed for non-prosecution. In spite of

the same, on 18-10-2021, no progress could be made and on

12-11-2021, at request, the matter stood adjourned to today.

Despite the same, the learned counsel for both the parties have

remained absent today also, showing no reasons for their non-

appearance. Hence, the appeal stands dismissed for non-

prosecution.

In view of disposal of the main appeal, pending I.A. does

not survive for consideration.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BMV*