Smt A Vinovathi Bai vs C Chinnappa
2023 Latest Caselaw 4346 Kant

                                           -1-
                                                 NC: 2023:KHC:24181
                                                    RFA No. 1456 of 2017




                    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. 1456 OF 2017 (INJ)


               BETWEEN:

               1.   SMT A VINOVATHI BAI
                    W/O ARJUN RAO,
                    AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
                    R/AT NO.1/1, HOUSE NO.4.

               2.   SRI.ARJUN RAO
                    S/O LATE SHAM RAO,
                    AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,

                    BOTH ARE R/AT NO.1/1, HOUSE NO.4
                    2ND FLOOR, 5TH B CROSS,
                    NALA ROAD, NEELASANDRA
                    ANEPALYA,
Digitally           ADUGODI POST,
signed by
VEENA               BANGALORE-560 080.
KUMARI B
Location:
                                                               ...APPELLANTS
High Court
of Karnataka   (BY SRI. ARUN A. GADAG., ADVOCATE)
               AND:
               1. C CHINNAPPA
                  S/O LATE AJJAPPA,
                  AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
                  R/O NO.1, NALE ROAD,
                  5TH B CROSS,
                  ANEPALYA, BANGALORE-560 030.
                             -2-
                                      NC: 2023:KHC:24181
                                        RFA No. 1456 of 2017




2.   THE COMMISSIONER
     BBMP, CORPORATION BUILDING,
     NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE
     BANGALORE-560 002.
                                                 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.G.V. SHASHI KUMAR., ADVOCATE)


      THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF
CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.04.2017
PASSED IN OS NO.6762/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE XVII ADDL.
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, IN CHARGE OF IX ADDL. CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, (CCH 5), DISMISSING
THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
      THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                            ORDER

None appear for the appellants either physically or

through video conference.

2. Learned counsel for respondent no.1 alone is

physically present.

3. Perused the memo of retirement filed by the

learned counsel for the appellants.

NC: 2023:KHC:24181 RFA No. 1456 of 2017

4. Admittedly, there are more than one appellant in

this matter. Except appellant No.1 remaining appellants have

not signed either the notice of the retirement or acknowledged

the retirement of their counsel. As such, the memo of

retirement stands rejected.

In view of non-filing of the paper book, in spite of

granting several and sufficient opportunities and also for not

showing any reasons for non filing of paper book, the appeal

stands dismissed for non-prosecution as well as for non-filing

of paper book.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BVK