Shobha vs Raju
2023 Latest Caselaw 1906 Kant

                                               -1-
                                                        RSA No. 1124 of 2019




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                           DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

                                            BEFORE

                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                        REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1124 OF 2019 (SP)

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    SHOBHA
                         W/O. MAHADEV,
                         AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
                         RESIDENT OF BANDIPALYA VILLAGE,
                         KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK,
                         MYSORE DISTRICT-570 025.
                                                              ...APPELLANT

                          (BY SRI. HARIPRASAD M.B ., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])

                   AND:

                   1.    RAJU
                         S/O. LATE JAVAREGOWDA,
Digitally signed         AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
by SHARANYA T            RESIDENT OF GOHALLY VILLAGE,
Location: HIGH           ELAVALA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK,
COURT OF                 MYSORE DISTRICT-571 103.
KARNATAKA
                                                              ...RESPONDENT

                        THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST
                   THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.06.2016 PASSED IN
                   R.A.NO.04/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
                   AND JMFC., K.R.PETE, DISMISSING    THE APPEAL FILED
                   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.10.2011
                   PASSED IN O.S.NO.152/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL
                   JUDGE AND JMFC., K.R.PETE.

                       THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
                   COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                    -2-
                                             RSA No. 1124 of 2019




                               ORDER

This appeal was filed in the year 2019. When the matter

was listed before the Court on 30.01.2022, this Court granted

three weeks time to comply with the office objections and

inspite of the same, the office objections are not complied with.

The matter was again listed before the Court on 02.03.2023

and learned counsel for the appellant sought time and hence,

this Court granted two weeks time to comply with the office

objections on payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- and also made it

clear that, if the cost is not paid and the office objections are

not complied within two weeks, list the matter for dismissal.

Learned counsel for the appellant is absent and learned

counsel for the appellant has neither paid the cost nor complied

with the office objections.

Hence, in view of the peremptory order dated

02.03.2023, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of

office objections and non-payment of cost.

Sd/-

JUDGE

ST