Karnataka High Court
Smt. Neelamma vs Smt. Parvathamma on 12 June, 2023
Bench: Dr.H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:20086
RFA No. 1148 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1148 OF 2022 (PAR/POS)
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Neelamma
W/O Late Ujjinappa
Aged 51 Years
Agriculturist
R/O Avagere
Davanagere Taluk And District.
2. Smt. Saraswathi
W/o Prasanna
D/o Ujjinappa
Aged 30 Years
Agriculturist
R/O Mudenuru
Ranebennur Taluk
Haveri District.
Digitally signed
by
...Appellants
BHARATHIDEVI
K KORLAHALLI (By Smt.Manjula N.V.,
Location: High
Court of And Sri. Revanna Bellary, Advocates)
Karnataka
AND:
1. Smt. Parvathamma
W/o Late Siddaveerappa
Aged about 68 Years
Agriculturist
2. Sri Basavarajappa
W/O Late Siddaveerappa
Aged about 52 Years
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:20086
RFA No. 1148 of 2022
Agriculturist
Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are
R/O Avaregere
Davanagere Taluk And District.
3. Sri Thippeswamy
W/o Late Siddaveerappa
Aged about 50 Years
Granite Work
R/O 880/B, 9th Cross
3rd Main, Mahadevapura
Behind Chamundeshwari Temple
Mysore District - 8.
...Respondents
This Regular First Appeal is filed under Order 41 Rule 1 of
Civil Procedure Code, praying to set aside the judgment and
decree in OS.No.16/2021 on the file of I Addl.Sr.Civil Judge and
JMFC Court, Davanagere and decree the suit OS 16/2021 allotting
1/3rd share each to respondent No.2 and 3 and jointly to the
appellants.
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, who is physically
present in the Court, files IA.No.1/2023 under Section 151 of
Code of Civil Procedure, seeking dispensation of production of
certified copy of the judgment and decree and Valuation Slip in
O.S.No.16/2021.
2. Perused the memorandum of facts filed by the learned
counsel for the appellants and heard her submission.
NC: 2023:KHC:20086
RFA No. 1148 of 2022
3. The said memorandum of facts is incomplete in some
aspects and some of the paragraphs are kept blank, including
non-mentioning of the alleged FDP number. Irrespective of the
same, considering the reasons shown and also of the fact that
several and sufficient opportunities, even as an ultimate
opportunity, have been given to the appellants in this matter,
which includes granting of time of not less than four times, I
do not find any reason to allow the application. Had the
appellants be diligent in applying and obtaining the certified
copy of the judgment by this time, they could have done, but,
now to furnish the same, the appellants have come up with
the present application.
As such, IA.No.1/2023 under consideration stands
rejected. The Appeal stands dismissed for
non-compliance of office objections.
Sd/-
JUDGE
