Sri. M. Jaffer Baig vs Sri Moqtar Ahamed Baig
2022 Latest Caselaw 999 Kant

                         1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                      BEFORE

   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

             R.S.A. No.1733 OF 2019

BETWEEN:

SRI. M. JAFFER BAIG,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
S/O LATE RAHAMAN BAIG,
RESIDENT OF M/S SHAFFI STEEL,
NO.541/1 , 541/2, 541/3,
GROUND FLOOR, RAJEEV NAGAR,
MYSURU - 570 019.
                                      ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI.DINESH RAO N, ADV.)

AND:

SRI MOQTAR AHAMED BAIG,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
S/O LATE INAYATH ULLA BAIG
RESIDENT OF D.NO.14, M G ROAD,
UDAYAGIRI
MYSURU - 570 019.

SINCE DECEASED
REPRESENTED BY LRS.

1(a) SRI.ZAHADABEGAM,
     W/O LATE MOQTAR AHAMED BAIG,
     AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
                          2
     RESIDING AT NO.14, M.G.ROAD,
     UDAYAGIRI,
     MYSORE - 570 019.

1(b) MR.MOHAMMED AHMED,
     S/O LATE MOQTAR AHAMED BAIG,
     AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,

     RESIDING AT NO.14, M.G.ROAD,
     UDAYAGIRI,
     MYSORE - 570 019.

1(c) MISS. AYESHA MOQTAR,
     D/O LATE MOQTAR AHAMED BAIG,
     RESIDING AT NO.14, M.G.ROAD,
     UDAYAGIRI,
     MYSORE - 570 019.
                                     ... RESPONDENTS

     (BY SRI.V.RANGARAMU, ADV.,)


     THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC
1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
19.08.2019 PASSED IN RA NO.336/2018 ON THE FILE OF
THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU
DISMISSING   THE    APPEAL   AND    CONFIRMING   THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.10.2017 PASSED IN
OS NO.450/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.I CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC, MYSORE.


     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                3
                          JUDGMENT

1. The counsel for the appellant has filed a memo for

retirement on the ground that he has no instructions and

the notice of retirement sent by him has been returned.

2. On 10.11.2021, two weeks' time had been granted to

deposit the arrears of rent. However, the said rents have

not been deposited. On 25.11.2021, there was no

representation and the matter was adjourned by two

weeks. On 04.01.2022, at the request of the counsel for

the appellant, the matter was ordered to be listed on

11.01.2022. Again on 11.01.2022, as a last chance, ten

days' time was granted to the appellant to deposit the

arrears of rent and the mater was ordered to be listed

today.

3. In view of the fact that the order dated 10.11.2021

and 11.01.2022 have not been complied with and the

appellant is not furnishing the instructions to the counsel

for the appellant, it is clear that he is not interested in

prosecuting the appeal.

4. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

GH