Sayyedbegum W/O. Mainuddin ... vs Parikshith S/O. Vijayanand ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 12745 Kant

                          :1:



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNA TAKA
                  DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED TH IS THE 11 T H DAY OF JULY 2016


                       BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR.JUS TICE A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA


                R.F.A.NO.100224/2015

BETWEEN:

VIJAYANAND S/O .VENKA TESH KELAGADI
AGE: 49 YEARS , OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. MIG 90/1 KARNA TAKA HOUSING
BOARD COLONY,
CHANNAPETH OLD HUBLI, HUBLI,
DIST: DHARWAD.
                                        ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI SACHIN S. MAGADUM, ADVOCATE.)

AND

1.    PARIKASHITH S/O VIJAYANAND KELAGADI
      AGE: 18 YEARS , OCC: S TUDENT
      R/O: C/O.RAMCHANDRA NAIK
      2 N D MAIN MAHALAXMI MAGAR BA TAVAID
      TUMAKURU-3
      REP. BY NA TURAL GUARDIAN/
      RESPONDENT NO.2
      SMT.VIJAYALAXMI
      W/O VIJAYANAND KELAGADI
      AGE: 41 YEARS , OCC: HOUSE WIFE
      R/O: C/O.RAMCHANDRA NAIK
      2 N D MAIN MAHALAXMI NAGAR
      BATAVAID , TUMAKURU-3

2.    SMT.VIJAYALAXMI
      W/O. VIJAYANAND KELAGADI
      AGE: 41 YEARS , OCC: HOUSE WIFE
      R/O: C/O.RAMCHANDRA NAIK
      2 N D MAIN MAHALAXMI MAGAR BA TAVAID
      TUMAKURU-3
                                :2:




3.   SMT.SARASWA TI CALLING HERSELF AS
     W/O VIJAYANAND KELAGADI
     AGE: 40 YEARS , OCC: HOUSE WIFE
     R/O: MIG 90/1 KARNA TAKA HOUSING
     BOARD COLONY
     CHANNAPETH OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI
     DIST: DHARWAD-580001

4.   SMT.SAYYEDBEGUM
     W/O MAINUDDIN SOUDAGAR
     AGE: 46 YEARS , OCC: RELIG IOUS PEACHER
     R/O: DOODANAN DARGA, TORAVI HAKKAL
     HUBBALLI, DIS T: DHARWAD-580001

                                            ... RESPONDENTS

     THIS REGULAR FIRS T APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RU LE 1 READ WITH S ECTION 96 OF CPC,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE TH E JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DARTED 05.07.2014, PASSED IN O.S .NO.32/2012, BY
THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBLI, BY
ALLOWING TH IS APPEAL, ETC.,.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR O RDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                        JUDGMENT

Sri Scahin S. Magadum, learned Advocate

submits that despite depositing the cost and the

appellant being notified, there is no co-operation

to comply with the office objections. Since

sufficient time has already been granted for

compliance of office objections, the appellant

being not diligent, and as he is stated to have

been not extended the co-operation to his learned

Advocate, I have no other alternative except to

dismiss the appeal for non prosecution, despite

the learned Advocate Sri Sachin Magadum seeking

further time. Hence the appeal is dismissed for

non prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE Mrk/-