Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 4882 Kant
Judgement Date : 26 July, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:26013
RFA No. 554 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 554 OF 2018 (INJ)
BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Madappa Gopal
S/o Late Madappa
Aged about 58 years
2. Smt. Manjula Rangamallaiah
C/o Sri. Madappa Gopal
Aged about 56 years
Both are residing at
No.309, 15th Cross
Behind Food World,
Sadashivanagar,
Bangalore-560080.
...Appellants
Digitally signed
by (By Sri. Vijayakumar Y.H. and
BHARATHIDEVI
K KORLAHALLI Sri. S.K.Srinivasan, Advocates)
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
AND:
Smt. Anitha Srinivas
W/o Srinivas
Aged about 52 years,
Residing at No.76, 9th Main,
7th Cross,
Saraswathipuram,
Mysore-570009.
...Respondent
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:26013
RFA No. 554 of 2018
This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of Civil
Procedure Code, praying to call for the records in
O.S.No.484/2010 on the file of XXIX Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge, CCH-30, Bangalore City and to allow this
appeal by dismissing the suit of the plaintiff in
O.S.No.484/2010 on the file of XXIX Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge, CCH-30, Bangalore city by setting aside the
judgment and decree passed in the above matter on
14.12.2017 and for costs of the appeal.
This Regular First Appeal coming on for Orders through
Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing, this day, the Court made
the following:
ORDER
None appear in the matter either physically or
through Video Conference.
2. A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that
the present appeal is of the year 2018, in which the office
objections appears to have not been complied till January
2023. As such, to just comply the office objections, it
appears that the appellants have taken nearly five years
time. Thereafter, the matter came to be admitted on
13.02.2023. However, till date, the appellants have not
taken steps to issue notice to the respondent.
NC: 2023:KHC:26013 RFA No. 554 of 2018
In the above background, when the appellants are
not evincing any interest to prosecute the matter and not
even taken the steps and further the learned counsel for
the appellants has not even appeared in this matter either
physically or through Video Conference, an inference can
be drawn that the appellants are not interested in
prosecuting the matter and to take steps.
Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed for
non-prosecution, as well for not taking the steps.
Sd/-
JUDGE
bk/
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!