Smt Jayashree Jagannath vs Sri Vaddadi Jagannath
2022 Latest Caselaw 7939 Kant

                            -1-



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

           DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                          BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD

       MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2187/2021 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

1.     SMT. JAYASHREE JAGANNATH
       VADDADI W/O VEDDADDI JAGANNATH
       AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

2.     SRI VADDADI SIDDHARTH
       SIDDARTH JAGANNATH
       S/O VADDADI JAGANATH
       AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

3.     SRI SURYAKUMARA JAGANNATH
       S/O VADDADI JAGANNATH
       AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

4.     KUM. KRITHIKA BHANUPRABHA
       D/O VADDADI JAGANNATH
       AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,

       ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.104
       1ST STAGE 1ST MAIN, 3RD CROSS, AREKERE
       MICO LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 076.
                                           ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. VARADARAJ R HAVALDAR, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

AND:

1.     SRI. VADDADI JAGANNATH
       S/O LATE V R RAO
       AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
       RESIDING AT NO.1A, SHOBITA APARTMENT
       12TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, J P NAGAR, 3RD PHASE
       BANGALORE - 560 078.
                                  -2-



2.      THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
        VIJAYA BANK, SARAKKI BRANCH
        BANGALORE - 560 078.
                                            ... RESPONDENTS

      THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
MFA FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC AGAINST THE
ORDER DATED 11.02.2021 PASSED ON I.A. NO.1 AND 2 IN
O.S.NO. 637/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE XIX ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH.18)
DISMISSING I.A. NO.1 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2
OF CPC AND ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER 39
RULE 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC.

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                           JUDGMENT

Perused the order dated 20.04.2022. None

appeared on behalf of the appellants on the previous

hearing date and none appears for the appellants even

today. It is obvious that the concerned is not interested

in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal stands

dismissed for default.

SD/-

JUDGE

SA Ct:sr