Sri C Dasegowda vs Sri Govindaraju
2021 Latest Caselaw 3497 Kant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

                       BEFORE

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

       REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.207 OF 2012

BETWEEN:

SRI C.DASEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
S/O SRI CHIKKATHIMMAIAH,
RESIDING AT NAGARBHAVI VILLAGE,
OPP. MARUTHI TEMPLE,
I.S.E.C ROAD, NAGARBHAVI,
BANGALORE-560 072.                   :APPELLANT

(BY SRI D.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SRI GOVINDARAJU
       S/O SRI SANJEEVAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
       RESIDING AT NO.15, GAYATHRI,
       HBCS LAYOUT, BASAWESHWARANAGARA,
       BANGALORE-560 040.

2.     SRI. L.VEERAPPAJI
       S/O SRI LINGAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
       R/AT NO.1, NEAR SKYLINE APARTMENTS,
       CANARA BANK COLONY MAIN ROAD,
       BANGALORE-560 072.
                                             RFA 207/2012
                        2



3.   SRI. V.G.NARAHARI,
     S/O LATE SRI GOPALAKRISHNAIAH,
     AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
     R/AT KENGUTE, MALLATHAHALLI
     JNANABHARATHI POST,
     BANGALORE-560 040.

4.   SRI. S. SURESH
     S/O SRI. T. SIDDAPPA,
     AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
     NO.24/8, 1ST MAIN ROAD,
     7TH 'A' CROSS ROAD, DEEPANJALINAGAR,
     BANGALORE-560 079.

5.   CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BANGALORE,
     NEAR KITTUR RANI CHENNAMMA CIRCLE,
     BANGALORE,
     BY ITS COMMISSIONER-560 009.
                                   ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI N.R.JAGADEESWARA,
ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.5,
RESPONDENT NO.1, 2 AND 4 SERVED
NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.3 HELD
SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 26.03.2014)

      THIS   REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 96 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.10.2011PASSED IN
O.S. NO.318/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSINS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (CCH-5),
DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND
ETC.,

     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                                   RFA 207/2012
                              3



                          ORDER

Learned counsel for the appellant who is appearing

through video conference once again prays time to file

paper book.

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

that this appeal is of the year 2012. Several and sufficient

opportunities have been granted to file paper book. The

appeal was once dismissed on 03.03.2017. The said order

came to be recalled at the applications i.e., IA No.2/2018

and IA No.3/2018 filed by the appellant though with delay

of 483 days on 14.08.2018, by imposing a cost of `2,000/-

and the appeal was restored to file. At that point of time

itself, the appellant was directed to file paper book within a

period of six weeks. More than three years has been

lapsed, the appellant has not filed the paper book in the

matter.

Subsequently, on 06.01.2021, as a last chance, four

more weeks time was granted to the appellant to file paper RFA 207/2012

book. Once again on 30.03.2021, as a last chance,

another four weeks time was granted to the appellant to

file paper book.

3. In spite of the above, without assigning any

valid reasons, the appellant is seeking some more time to

file the paper book. I do not find any reason for granting

time, as such, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-filing of

paper book.

Sd/-

JUDGE

mbb