Smt H R Lakshmidevi vs Krishna Reddy
2023 Latest Caselaw 3607 Kant

                                                     -1-
                                                           NC: 2023:KHC:21731-DB
                                                               RFA No. 709 of 2011




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                                 DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2023

                                                PRESENT

                               THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR

                                                     AND

                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

                            REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 709 OF 2011 (SP)

                      BETWEEN:

Digitally signed by   1.     SMT. H.R. LAKSHMIDEVI
ANUSHA V                     AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
Location: HIGH        2.     K.V. JAGADISH
COURT OF                     AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
KARNATAKA
                      3.     K.V.GANESH
                             AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

                      4.     SMT. K.V. ANITHA
                             AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS

                             NO.1 WIFE OF AND 2 TO 4
                             CHILDREN OF LATE M.VENKATASWAMYA

                             ALL ARE R/AT
                             'NAYANA', NO.72, 5TH MAIN
                             MARUTHI LAYOUT, BTM I STAGE
                             BANGALORE-560 081.                     ...APPELLANTS

                      (BY SHRI. SANTHOSH, ADVOCATE FOR
                          SHRI. M.S. VARADARAJAN, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.     KRISHNA REDDY
                             S/O C. NARAYANA REDDY
                             AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
                             RESIDING AT NO. 110
                             3RD CROSS, CHIKKALAKSHMAIAH LAYOUT
                             BANGALORE-560 029.
                                -2-
                                        NC: 2023:KHC:21731-DB
                                            RFA No. 709 of 2011




2.   SMT. MALATHI
     AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

3.   BABY USHA RANI
     AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

     R2 WIFE OF AND R3
     DAUGHTER OF LATE M. VENKATASWAMY

     R2 AND R3 ARE RESIDING AT
     NO.29-9-214, NTR COLONY
     HINDUPUR TQ
     ANDHRA PRADESH
     PINCODE:515 201.                            ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI. K.C.E. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE
    SHRI. G MANIVANNAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
VIDE ORDER DTD 11/07/2011 NOTICE TO R2 AND
R3 ARE DISPENSED WITH)

      THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.02.2011 PASSED IN
O.S.9393/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
JUDGE, BANGALORE, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR THE SPECIFIC
PERFORMANCE.

      THIS RFA, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
P.S.DINESH KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

Shri Santhosh, learned advocate for the

appellants submits that he has issued notice to the

appellants on 01.04.2023. Yet, he has not received any

response. He intends to retire from the proceedings.

He has filed a memo of even date and it reads as

follows;

"Counsel for the appellants respectfully submits that since there is no instructions from the appellants, a Registered notice of retirement was sent and the same has been served to the appellants. Copy of the Legal Notice, poatal receipts and acknowledgements

NC: 2023:KHC:21731-DB RFA No. 709 of 2011

are enclosed herewith. Hence the under singed prays that they may be permitted to retire from the above case for want of instructions, in the interest of justice." (sic)

2. Memo be kept in record. He is permitted to retire

from the proceedings.

3. This appeal is of the year 2011. No alternative

arrangement is made by the appellants nor

appellants are present in the court. Appellants do not

seem to be interested in prosecuting this appeal.

In the circumstance, this appeal is dismissed for

non-prosecution.

4. In view of disposal of this appeal, all pending

interlocutory applications do not survive for

consideration and they stand disposed of.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

AV