Sri Kumar vs Smt Manjula
2023 Latest Caselaw 1591 Kant

                                           -1-
                                                      MFA No.3913 of 2016




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                        DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023
                                        PRESENT
                          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                           AND
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A PATIL
                     MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3913 OF 2016 (MC)
                BETWEEN:

                1.    SRI. KUMAR
                      S/O SRI. RANGAIAH
Digitally
signed by             AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
RUPA V                RESIDENT OF HARAGALADEVIGUDDAKAVAL
Location:             KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK - 572216
High Court of         TUMKUR DISTRICT.
Karnataka                                                      ...APPELLANT
                (BY SRI. CHETHAN B, ADV., (ABSENT))
                AND:

                1.    SMT. MANJULA
                      W/O SRI. KUMAR
                      AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
                      RESIDENT OF HARAGALADEVIGUDDAKAVAL
                      KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK - 572216
                      TUMKUR DISTRICT.

                                                              ...RESPONDENT
                (BY SRI. G.M. GADILINGAPPA, ADV., (ABSENT))

                     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.28(1) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE
                ACT,    AGAINST         THE    JUDGMENT     AND    AWARD
                DATED:01.03.2016 PASSED ON MC NO.38/13 ON THE FILE OF
                THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, GUBBI, DISMISSING THE PETITION
                FILED U/S.13(i)(ia)(ib) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.

                    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
                ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                           -2-
                                  MFA No.3913 of 2016




                     JUDGMENT

None appeared even when the matter is called in

the second round.

It appears the appellant is not interested in

prosecuting the appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of

prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

SS