Pushpa vs Superintendent Engineer
2023 Latest Caselaw 4697 Kant

                                           -1-
                                                 NC: 2023:KHC:25369
                                                    RFA No. 1664 of 2021




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                         DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
                                           BEFORE
                    THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
                      REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1664 OF 2021 (RES)
               BETWEEN:
               1. PUSHPA
                  W/O LATE SRINIVASA
                  AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

               2.   DEEXITHA
                    S/O LATE SRINIVASA
                    AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS,

                    (APPELLANTS NO.2 IS MINOR REPRESENTED
                    BY MINOR GUARDIAN APPELLANT NO.1.)

                    ALL ARE RESIDING AT
                    HIPPEMARADHODDI VILLAGE,
                    KOOTAKAL HOBLI
Digitally           RAMANAGARA TALUK,
signed by
VEENA
KUMARI B
                    RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-571511
Location:
High Court
                                                               ...APPELLANTS
of Karnataka
               (BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE)
               AND:

               SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER
               BESCOM O AND M CIRCLE,
               OLD KOTHITHOPU ROAD,
               TUMAKURU TUMAKURU DISTRICT
                                                              ...RESPONDENT
                              -2-
                                    NC: 2023:KHC:25369
                                        RFA No. 1664 of 2021




     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96
R/W ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 11.02.2019 PASSED IN OS.NO.124/2017 ON
THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM,
TUMAKURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF
DAMAGES.


     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 is neither present

physically nor through Video Conference. No reasons are

forthcoming for his non-appearance.

2. In spite of granting several and sufficient

opportunities of not less than four times, the appellants have

not complied the office objections and has not shown any

reasons for not complying the office objections.

3. On the other hand a perusal of the order sheet

would go to show that the office objections which are yet to be

complied are too simple and trivial in nature. Hence, it is

NC: 2023:KHC:25369 RFA No. 1664 of 2021

inferred that appellants are not evincing any interest either to

comply the office objections or to prosecute the matter

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

in this appeal of the year 2021.

Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-

compliance of office objections, as well as for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BVK