Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3562 Kant
Judgement Date : 29 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
R.F.A.No.169 OF 2012
BETWEEN:
M/s. Commission and General Agency,
A registered Partnership firm
which is carrying on its business
Formerly at No.43, J.C. Road,
Bangalore - 560 002.
and at present at No.19/1,
R.V. Road, Vishveshwarapuram,
Bangalore- 560 004.
represented by its partner
Sri.M.K. Gopalaswamy.
...Appellant
(By Sri.S. Venugopala & Sri.B. Sharath Kumar, Advocates)
AND:
1. The Commissioner,
Bangalore Mahanagara Palike,
Corporation Buildings,
Bangalore - 560 002.
2. The Competent Officer and
Deputy Commissioner (Admn.)
Bangalore Mahanagara Palike,
Corporation Buildings,
Bangalore-560 002.
3. Sri.V. Srirama Reddy,
Father's name not known to the
R.F.A.No.169/2012
2
appellant, major in age,
Deputy Commissioner (Admn)
Bangalore Mahanagara Palike,
Corporation Buildings,
Bangalore - 560 002.
4. Sri. Lingaraja Urs,
Father's name not known to the
appellant, major in age,
Deputy Commissioner (Revenue)
Bangalore Mahanagara Palike,
Corporation Buildings,
Bangalore- 560 002.
5. Sri.B.R. Narayana Setty,
Son of late B. Rajarathnam Setty,
Major in age,
Residing at No.7,
Old No.159, Vanivila Road,
Basavanagudi
Bangalore - 560 004.
6. Sri.B.N. Chandra Shekar,
Son of Sri B.R. Naayana Setty,
Major in age,
Residing at No.7,
Old No.159, Vanivila Road,
Basavanagudi,
BANGALORE - 560 004.
...Respondents
(By Sri.S.N. Prashanth Chandra, Advocate for R-1 & R-2;
R-3 & R-4 - appeal stand dismissed v/o.dt.22.06.2016;
R-5 & R-6 - served and un-represented)
****
This R.F.A. is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, praying to set aside the judgment and decree dated
01-10-2011 passed in O.S.No.4443/2006 on the file of the 42nd
R.F.A.No.169/2012
3
Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge at Bangalore (CCH-43),
and decree the suit of the plaintiff as prayed for, grant to the
appellant costs of this appeal as well as that of the Trial Court
and grant to the appellants such other further reliefs that may be
deemed fit necessary along with costs of this appeal in the
interest of justice and equity.
This R.F.A. coming on for Orders, through Physical
Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made
the following:
ORDER
Called again in the third round. Learned counsel for the
appellant neither present physically nor through video
conference.
Learned counsel for Respondent No.1 alone is appearing
through video conference. On 06-01-2021, this Court had made
the following observation:
" The learned counsel for the appellants shall comply with the office objections raised on paper book within two weeks. If the office objections on the paper book are not attended to by two weeks, the appeal shall be listed for necessary orders for dismissal of the appeal."
Thereafter, at the request of the learned counsel for the
appellant, on 30-03-2021, once again, four weeks' time was R.F.A.No.169/2012
granted to file the paper book, despite which, the appellant did
not filed the paper book.
Today, the matter was called in two rounds and the
matter was passed over. However, still the appellant has not
filed the paper book. The appellant neither has appeared nor
filed the paper book nor even shown any reason for his non-
appearance. As such, by virtue of the order dated 06-01-2021,
the appeal stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BMV*
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!