Renuka vs Superintendent Engineer
2023 Latest Caselaw 4344 Kant

                                              -1-
                                                    NC: 2023:KHC:24178
                                                       RFA No. 160 of 2022




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                             DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
                                              BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
                          REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 160 OF 2022 (RES)
                   BETWEEN:
                   1. RENUKA
                      W/O LATE KUMAR
                      AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

                   2.   LIKITH
                        S/O LATE KUMAR
                        AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS

                   3.   HARSHA
                        S/O LATE KUMAR
                        AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS

                        (SINCE 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REP BY THEIR
                        NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER 1ST PLAINTIFF
                        RENUKA)
                        ALL ARE R/O K MALLAPURA VILLAGE
Digitally signed
by VEENA                HALEBEEDU HOBLI, BELUR TALUK
KUMARI B
Location: High          HASSAN DISTRICT - 573201
Court of
Karnataka                                                        ...APPELLANTS
                   (BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE.,ADVOCATE)
                   AND:
                   SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER
                   O AND M CIRCLE OFFICER
                   CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY
                   CORPORAITON LTD, SANTHEPETE B M ROAD
                   HASSAN - 571401
                                                                 ...RESPONDENT
                              -2-
                                     NC: 2023:KHC:24178
                                          RFA No. 160 of 2022




     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96
R/W ORDER 4 RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED 10.09.2016 PASSED IN OS No.82/2016 ON THE
FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HASSAN, PARTLY
DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DAMAGES/COMPENSATION.


     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                             ORDER

Learned counsel for the appellants neither present

physically nor through video conference. No reasons are

forthcoming for his nonappearance.

2. On 03.07.2023 this Court had made the following

observation.

"Learned counsel for the appellants is neither present physically nor through Video Conference.

Though the appeal could have been dismissed for non-compliance of office objections, however, in the best interest of justice, as a final opportunity, a week's time is granted to comply the office objections, failing which, the Court may proceed to pass appropriate orders, including dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance of office objections.

In case, if the office objections are not complied with in their entirety within the said

NC: 2023:KHC:24178 RFA No. 160 of 2022

time, registry to list the matter on 12.07.2023."

3. In spite of the above, the appellants have not

complied the office objections. Several and sufficient

opportunities of not less than three times have been granted

in this appeal of the year 2022. No reasons are forthcoming for

noncompliance of office objections and for nonappearance.

4. A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that

the office objections which are yet to be complied with are

simple and trivial in nature, despite which, the appellants are

not evincing any interest to comply the office objections. As

such, I do not find any reason to grant any further time.

Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed for non-

prosecution and noncompliance of office objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE