Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5008 Kant
Judgement Date : 28 July, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:26519
RFA No. 1644 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1644 OF 2013 (DEC)
BETWEEN:
1. K JAYAPRAKASH
S/O LATE B. KATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/A 66-B, VENKATESHWARA COLONY
3RD CROSS, NEW THIPPASANDRA
BANGALORE-75.
2. S. VENKATESH
S/O SRINIVASA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/A SWAMY VIVEKANANDA ASHRAM
HOODY VILLAGE
BANGALORE-560048.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K JAYAPRAKASH., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by
DHANALAKSHMI AND:
MURTHY
Location: High 1. DR I P SINGH
Court of
Karnataka BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES
1(a) SMT. REETHAIKA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
D/O LATE DR. I.P. SINGH.
1(b) SMT. SHALINI SINGH
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
D/O DR. I.P. SINGH
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:26519
RFA No. 1644 of 2013
2. SMT. NALINI SINGH
W/O I.P. SINGH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
ALL ARE R/A NO.18, HAILEY ROAD
NEW DELHI-110001.
3. T. JAYARAM
S/O DHANAKODI
R/AT VENKATESHWARA TENT ROAD
RAMAREDDY LAYOUT
DEVASANDRA, BANGALORE 560016.
4. A.M. SATHYANARAYANA
S/O A. MARIYAPPA
R/A NO.144, NEHRU NAGAR
BANGALORE-560020.
5. A.M. RAMAMURTHY
S/O A. MARIYAPPA
6. SMT.A.M SAROJAMMA
W/O LATE A. MARIYAPPA
R5 & R6 R/A NO.144
NEHRU NAGAR
BANGALORE 560020
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. UMA SHANKAR M N., ADVOCATE)
THIS RFA FILED UNDER SECTION 96, R/W, RULE-1 OF
CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED08.08.2013
PASSED IN O.S.8671/2004 ON THE FILE OF XIV-ADDL. CITY
CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR
DECLARATION, POSSESSION AND MESNE PROFITS.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:26519
RFA No. 1644 of 2013
JUDGMENT
This court by order dated 8.1.2019 had permitted the
learned counsel for the appellants to retire from the case
on the ground that the appellants have back the entire file
from the counsel and directed the office to show the name
of the appellants in the cause list.
So far, the appellants have not engaged the services
of any other counsel. Even on earlier occasions i.e.,
8.3.2019, 26.08.2022 and 4.7.2023, there was no
representation on behalf of the appellants.
Even today when the matter was called out, none
appeared for the appellants. It appears that the appellants
are not interested in prosecuting the case. Hence, the
appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DM
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!