Sri Rajachari vs The Special Land Acquisition ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5017 Kant

                                               -1-
                                                      NC: 2023:KHC:26669
                                                           MSA No. 102 of 2020




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

                                             BEFORE

                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                   MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 102 OF 2020 (LA)

                   BETWEEN:

                         SRI RAJACHARI
                         S/O SIDDACHARI
                         SINCE HE WAS DEAD HIS LRS

                   1.    SRI DINESH
                         S/O LATE RAJACHARI
                         AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

                   2.    SRI UMESH H.R.
                         S/O LATE RAJACHARI
                         AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

                         BOTH ARE R/AT HIRUGUPPE VILLAGE
                         MADIHALLI HOBLI, BELUR TALUK
                         HASSAN DISTRICT-57.
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T                                                 ...APPELLANTS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                (BY SRI. NARASIMHA MURTHY G.V., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
KARNATAKA

                   AND:

                   1.    THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
                         H.R.P. NO.2, HASSAN.
                         PIN CODE-573201.

                   2.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
                         HASSAN
                         HASSAN DISTRICT
                         PIN-57320.
                                                               ...RESPONDENTS
                                 -2-
                                        NC: 2023:KHC:26669
                                           MSA No. 102 of 2020




     THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.54 (2) OF THE LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 AGAINST JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 01.02.2017     PASSED IN LAC (APPEAL) NO.69/2016
ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. DISTRICT, JUDGE AT HASSAN AND
ETC.

    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                            JUDGMENT

The counsel for the appellants is absent. This matter

is listed for non-compliance of office objections for six

time. This appeal is filed in the year 2020 but till date, the

counsel for the appellants has not complied with the office

objections. Thus, it is clear that the counsel for the

appellants is not interested in pursuing the matter

diligently. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-

compliance of office objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SN