Smt. Ashwini vs Sri. Srinivasamurthy @ Shekar Vaedhan
2024 Latest Caselaw 9613 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Ashwini vs Sri. Srinivasamurthy @ Shekar Vaedhan on 2 April, 2024

Author: S Sunil Dutt Yadav

Bench: S Sunil Dutt Yadav

                                             -1-
                                                        NC: 2024:KHC:13479
                                                        CP No. 472 of 2023




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024

                                           BEFORE
                         THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
                               CIVIL PETITION NO. 472 OF 2023
                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    SMT. ASHWINI,
                         W/O SRNIVASAMURTHY @ SHEKAR VARDHAN,
                         AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

                   2.    THAKSHEEL,
                         S/O SRINIVASA MURTHY,
                         AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS,
                         SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY
                         HER NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER
                         SMT. ASHWINI,
                         BOTH ARE R/AT NO.132,
                         4TH MAIN, MUNESWARA NAGAR,
                         KAMAKSHIPALYA,
                         BANGALORE.
Digitally signed                                            ...PETITIONERS
by VIJAYA P
Location: High     (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNA SWAMY S., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
Court of
Karnataka
                   AND:

                   1.    SRI. SRINIVASAMURTHY @ SHEKAR VAEDHAN
                         S/O LATE RAMANA,

                   2.    SMT. CHENNA VEERAMMA,
                         W/O LATE RAMANNA,
                         BOTH ARE R/AT NO.601,
                         29TH A MAIN ROAD,
                         CORPORATION COLONY,
                         JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-69.
                           -2-
                                       NC: 2024:KHC:13479
                                       CP No. 472 of 2023




3.   SRI. R. VENKATARAJU @ SUDHAKAR,
     S/O LATE V RAMANNA,
     AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
     R/AT NO.601, 29TH A MAIN,
     CORPORATION COLONY,
     JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-69.

4.   SMT. R VENKATALAKSHMI @ ASHA,
     D/O LATE V RAMANNA,
     W/O D JAI KUMAR,
     AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
     R/AT NO.601, 29TH A MAIN,
     CORPORATION COLONY,
     JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-69.

5.   SRI. C.V. MUNI REDDY,
     S/O LATE M VENKATA REDDY,
     AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

6.   SMT. R LAKSHMI NARASAMMA,
     W/O C V MUNI REDDY,
     AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
     RESPONDENTS NO.5 AND 6
     BOTH ARE R/AT NO.1912/,
     SRI MANJUNATHA NILAYA,
     17TH MAIN ROAD, 15TH CROSS,
     AECS LAYOUT A BLOCK,
     NEAR MAHAGANAPTHI TEMPLE,
     SINGASANDRA POST,
     BEGUR HOBLI,
     BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,
     BENGALURU - 560 068.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS
                               -3-
                                            NC: 2024:KHC:13479
                                            CP No. 472 of 2023




     THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF
CPC, PRAYING     TO   PASS   A   JUDGMENT    AND   ORDER     BY
TRANSFERRING THE O.S. NO. 5261/2022, PENDING ON THE
FILE OF CCH NO. 67 TO O.S. NO. 1195/2017 PENDING ON THE
FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE
RURAL     DISTRICT,   BANGALORE     BY   RECORDING   COMMON
EVIDENCE IN BOTH CASE AND TO PASS COMMON JUDGMENT
AND DECREE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                             ORDER

Though office objections were raised on 16.11.2023,

till date none of the office objections are complied with.

2. The Registry had granted time for compliance

on 18.11.2023, 21.12.2023, 20.03.2024 and this Court

had granted time on 26.03.2024 as well. However, office

objections have not been complied with. There is no

representation on behalf of the petitioner when the matter

is called out.

NC: 2024:KHC:13479

3. Taking note of the absence of diligence in

prosecuting the proceedings, the petition is dismissed for

non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

MCR