Manchappa vs Nill
2023 Latest Caselaw 6208 Kant

                                             -1-
                                                           NC: 2023:KHC:31250
                                                         MFA No. 1381 of 2023




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                           BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
                   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1381 OF 2023 (ISA)
                   BETWEEN:

                   MANCHAPPA
                   S/O LATE SHIVANANJU,
                   AGED 34 YEARS,
                   R/AT RAMANAHALLI VILLAGE,
                   KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK
                   MYSURU DISTRICT.
                                                                 ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. JAI PRAKASH RAO.,ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   NILL

                                                            ...RESPONDENT
Digitally signed        THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 299 OF INDIAN
by
DHANALAKSHMI       SUCCESSION ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2022
MURTHY             PASSED IN P AND SC.NO.46/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.
Location: High     DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU, DISMISSING THE
Court of
Karnataka          PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 299 OF INDIAN SUCCESSION
                   ACT.

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

When the matter was posted before the Registrar

(R & H) on several occasions and granted sufficient time

NC: 2023:KHC:31250 MFA No. 1381 of 2023

for compliance of office objections, none appeared for the

appellant and office objections were not complied with.

Hence, the matter was posted before this Court on

29.8.2023.

On 29.8.2023, when the matter was called out, none

appeared for the appellant. Hence, the matter was ordered

to be listed on 30.8.2023 on top of the list for orders.

Again on 30.8.2023, when the matter was called out, none

appeared for the appellant. Hence, the matter was ordered

to be listed on 31.8.2023 on top of the list under the

caption 'for dismissal'.

Even today when the matter was called out, none

appeared for the appellant. Even the office objections are

not complied with. It appears that the appellant is not

interested in prosecuting the case. Hence, the appeal is

dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DM