Miss. P. Punitha vs Smt. Rukmini
2023 Latest Caselaw 5038 Kant

                                                  -1-
                                                        NC: 2023:KHC:26477
                                                          MFA No. 573 of 2016




                        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 FIRST APPEAL NO. 573 OF 2016 (CPC)

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    MISS. P. PUNITHA
                         D/O. S.V. PILLAPPA REDDY,
                         AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
                         RESIDING AT NO.69,
                         35TH MAIN, 7TH CROSS,
                         BTM LAYOUT II STAGE,
                         BANGALORE-560 029.
                                                              ...APPELLANT

                             (BY SRI B. SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
                   AND:

                   1.     SMT. RUKMIN
                           S/O. V. JAYARAMAPPA,
                          AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T             RESIDING AT NO.12,
Location: HIGH            1ST MAIN ROAD,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                 LAKKASANDRA,
                          BANGALORE-560 030.

                   2.     R. NAGESH
                          S/O. RAMESH,
                          AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
                          RESIDING AT 11TH CROSS ROAD,
                          3RD MAIN ROAD, WILSON GARDEN,
                          BANGALORE-560 027.

                   3.     H.P. NANJEGOWDA
                          S/O. LATE THIMMARAYAPPA,
                            -2-
                                 NC: 2023:KHC:26477
                                     MFA No. 573 of 2016




3(a) SUSHEELA,
     W/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
     AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

3(b) H.N. VENKATESH BABU
     S/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
     AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

3(c) MAHESHKUMAR
     S/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
     AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,

3(d) SMT. H.N. KAVITHA
     D/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
     W/O. JAIRAM,
     AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,

3(e) SMT. H.N. HEMANANDINI
     D/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
     W/O. KANTHAGONDAYA,
     AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

3(f)   H. N. NAVEENAKALA
       S/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
       AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

       ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.109/14,
       NO.42, 9TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN,
       BANGALORE-560 022.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS

   (BY SRI G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY ADVOCATE FOR R1;
     R3(a) TO R3(f) ARE SERVED APPEAL AGAINST R2 IS
        DISMISSED VIDE ORDER DATED 17.07.2019)

     THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(c) OF THE CPC,
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED16.10.2015 PASSED IN MISC.
NO.867/12 ON THE FILE OF THE 18TH ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED U/O.9
RULE 9 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC.
                                -3-
                                         NC: 2023:KHC:26477
                                           MFA No. 573 of 2016




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

                          JUDGMENT

Appellant's counsel is absent. This Court vide order dated

14.7.2023 observed that though matter is called twice and

counsel for the appellant on both the occasion was absent,

however, in the ends of justice an opportunity was given and

while giving the opportunity it made it clear that, if appellant's

counsel does not appear on the next date of hearing, appeal

will be dismissed for non-prosecution.

2. In spite of this order has been passed, the appellant's

counsel is not pursuing the matter diligently and hence, in view

of the previous order, appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

AP