Sri M A Tabreaz vs Sri Richord Joyce
2024 Latest Caselaw 10526 Kant

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 10526 Kant
Judgement Date : 18 April, 2024

Karnataka High Court

Sri M A Tabreaz vs Sri Richord Joyce on 18 April, 2024

Author: Jyoti Mulimani

Bench: Jyoti Mulimani

                                              -1-
                                                        NC: 2024:KHC:15185
                                                      RFA No. 1500 of 2014




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                        DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

                                             BEFORE
                       THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
                  REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1500 OF 2014 (DEC/INJ)
                BETWEEN:

                SRI. M.A.TABREAZ
                S/O MOHDAMMED ARIFULLA,
                AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
                RESIDING AT NO.8/4, 10TH "A" CROSS,
                ANEPALYA, NEELASANDRA POST,
                BANGALORE-560 047.
                                                              ...APPELLANT
                (BY SMT. VANAJAKSHI., ADVOCATE FOR
                    SRI. RASHEED KHAN., ADVOCATE)

                AND:

                    SRI. RICHORD JOYCE
                    S/O S.A.JOYCE,
                    AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
                    RESIDING AT: NO. 1054,
Digitally signed by
                    BDA QUARTERS,
THEJASKUMAR N II STAGE, AUSTIN TOWN,
Location: HIGH      BANGALORE-560 047.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                                                   ...RESPONDENT
                (BY SRI. P.VENKATARAMANA., ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

                     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
                96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:
                30.07.2014 PASSED IN O.S.1358/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE
                FILE OF XVIII-ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
                BENGALURU CITY.

                    THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
                ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                -2-
                                              NC: 2024:KHC:15185
                                           RFA No. 1500 of 2014




                             ORDER

Smt.Vanajakshi., learned counsel on behalf of

Sri.Rasheed Khan., for the appellant and Sri.P.Venkataramana.,

learned counsel for the caveator/ respondent have appeared in

person.

The captioned appeal is listed today for orders regarding

non compliance of office objections.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that short

accommodation may be granted to comply office objections.

Submission is noted.

As could be seen from the appeal papers, the appeal is

filed on 20.10.2014. The Registry concerned raised objections

on 22.11.2014. A perusal of the daily order sheet reveals that

though sufficient time was granted to comply office objections,

the appellant did not comply the office objections. The appeal

was listed on 29.05.2018, the Court granted a week's time as a

last chance to comply office objections, subject to payment of

cost of Rs.500/-. It was also ordered that, if the cost is not paid

or objections are not removed, appeal shall stand dismissed

automatically without reference to the Court.

NC: 2024:KHC:15185

The objections were not removed. In view of peremptory

order the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of office

objections. Accordingly, applications in I.A.Nos.1/2018 and

2/2018 were filed to condone the delay of 33 days in filing the

application and to recall the order of dismissal

dated:29.05.2018.

The appeal was listed on 27.07.2021, on that day notice

was ordered on I.A.No.1/2018.

The appeal was again listed on 26.07.2022 for orders

regarding furnishing of PF, C/Act, etc., to issue notice to the

respondent on I.A.No.1/2018. This Court taking note of the fact

that appellant had not made any efforts to pay the process to

enable the office to issue notice to respondent on

I.A.No.1/2018, dismissed the applications in I.A.No.1/2018 and

2/2018.

Thereafter, an application in I.A.No.1/2022 was filed to

recall the order dated:26.07.2022. The appeal was listed on

18.10.2022 and the Court allowed the application in

I.A.No.1/2022 and recalled the order dated:26.07.2022 and

directed to issue notice to the unserved respondents.

NC: 2024:KHC:15185

The appeal was listed on 13.02.2024, on that day, the

Court ordered that the appellant is not diligent in prosecuting

the appeal and once again dismissed the applications in

I.A.No.1/2018 and 2/2018 and also ordered that the order

passed by this Court on 29.05.2018 becomes final.

Once again, an application was filed in I.A.No.1/2024 to

recall the order dated:13.02.2024. The appeal was listed on

01.03.2024 and this Court allowed the application in

I.A.No.1/2024 and recalled the order dated:13.02.2024.

The appeal was again listed on 14.03.2024, on that day

the Court passed the following order:

"ORDER ON I.A.No.1/2018 and

I.A.No.1/2018 is filed to condone the delay of 33 days in filing the recalling application and I.A.No.2/2018 is filed to recall the order dated 29.05.2018 dismissing the appeal for non- prosecution.

Since the appeal was already admitted and there is a delay of only 33 days, this Court is of the view that the order dismissing the appeal for non-

NC: 2024:KHC:15185

prosecution has to be recalled and the appeal is to be restored.

Accordingly, the delay of 33 days is condoned by allowing I.A.No.1/2018 and the order dated 29.05.2018 is recalled by allowing I.A.No.2/2018. The appeal is restored to file.