C A Azeez vs Navida Quiym
2023 Latest Caselaw 184 Kant

                                               -1-
                                                           RFA No. 914 of 2018




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                        DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                                           BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
                          REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 914 OF 2018
                BETWEEN

                C A AZEEZ
                S/O C R ABDUL KHAN,
                AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
                R/AT NO.8/11, MARUTHI SEVANAGAR,
                ITC COLONY, JEEVANAHALLI, COX TOWN,
                BENGALURU-560005
                                                                    ...APPELLANT
                (BY SRI. JAYARAMA BHATT.S., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

                AND

                NAVIDA QUIYM
                D/O LATE INAMDAR ABDUL QAIYUM,
                AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
                R/AT A1 FUTTAIM CARILLION,
Digitally       PO BOX NO.1811,
signed by       DUBAI UAE
PANKAJA S
Location:       REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER,
High Court of   SYED SABEEL NAZIR
Karnataka       S/O SYED NAZIRUDDIEN,
                AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
                R/AT NO.7, CLINE ROAD, COOKE TOWN,
                BENGALURU - 560 005.
                                                                  ...RESPONDENT
                (BY SRI. PRASHANTH.P.N., ADVOCATE)


                      THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST
                THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.02.2018 PASSED IN
                O.S.NO.390/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE XVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
                SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR
                EJECTMENT.
                                 -2-
                                             RFA No. 914 of 2018




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


                            JUDGMENT

1. There is no appearance on behalf of the appellant. Even on

the last occasion there was no representation on behalf of the

appellant.

2. In view of the above, appeal is dismissed for non-

prosecution.

SD/-

JUDGE

SV