Karnataka High Court
Mrs Neelufer Khuraishi vs Dr Mrs Taj Jahan Begum on 13 February, 2024
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:6108
RFA No. 1486 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1486 OF 2020 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. MRS NEELUFER KHURAISHI
W/O LATE MEER SHOEB AHMED KHURAISHI
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
2. MR NAIF KHURAISHI
S/O LATE MEER SHOEB AHMED KHURAISHI
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
3. MR ABUZER KHURAISHI
S/O LATE MEER SHOEB AHMED KHURAISHI
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
(REP. BY GPA HOLDER HIS MOTHER
MRS NEELUFER KHURAISHI)
ALL ARE R/AT 1218/1
BIDAR KRISHNAPPA RAMAMANDIRA ROAD
Digitally signed by DEVARAJA MOHALA
HEMALATHA A MYSURU-570 024.
Location: High ...APPELLANTS
Court of (BY SRI.SRIDHAR CHAKKE., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
Karnataka
AND:
1. DR MRS TAJ JAHAN BEGUM
W/O SHOUKATH ALI KHAN
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
R/AT 68, DREAM MEADOWS
ITPL ROAD, 1ST MAIN ROAD
1ST CROSS, A BROOK FIELD
BANGALORE-560 037.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:6108
RFA No. 1486 of 2020
2. MRS NOOR JAHAN BEGUM
W/O MR NOOR AHMED MECCI
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS
R/AT 1/16, HIBA
HANUMANTHYA LAYOUT
ULSOOR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 042.
3. MRS SHAH JAHAN BEGUM
W/O MR MUJEEB REHAMAN
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS
R/AT FLAT 400, 17 LLOYD ROAD
COOKS TOWN, BANGALORE-560 005.
4. MRS GUL JAHAN BEGUM
W/O MR LATTEF AZAM KHADER
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
C/O MR NOOR AHMED MECCI
(PA HOLDER)
R/AT 1/16, HIBA
HANUMANTHYA LAYOUT
ULSOOR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 042.
5. MR MEER HASEEB AHMED KHURAISHI
S/O LATE MER BASHEER AHMED KHURAISHI
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/AT GROUND FLOOR
1218/1, B K STREET
DEVARAJA MOHALLA, MYSURU-24.
6. MR MEER IQBAL AHMED KHURAISHI
S/O LATE MEER BASHEER AHMED KHURAISHI
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/AT H-501, TAMBOURINE
KANAKAPURA ROAD
J P NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 078
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NANDITA K NAIR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. KIRAN V RON., ADVOCATE FOR R1:
NOTICE NOT ORDERED TO R2 TO R5)
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:6108
RFA No. 1486 of 2020
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 ORDER XLI RULE
1 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
19.03.2020 PASSED IN O.S.NO.412/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE
II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MYSURU,
DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE
POSSESSION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
When the matter was posted before the Registrar
for non-compliance of office objections for the fourth time,
none appeared for the appellants and the office objections
were not complied with.
2. The matter was posted for non-compliance of
office objections before the Court on 03.08.2023. On that
day, five weeks time was granted for compliance of office
objections. Then the matter was posted on 12.02.2024
for sixth time. On that day, none appeared for the
appellants and the office objections were not complied
with. The matter was ordered to be listed to today at the
top of the list under the caption 'for dismissal'.
NC: 2024:KHC:6108
3. Even today also, there is no representation on
behalf of the appellants in both the sessions and the office
objections are not complied with. Learned counsel for the
respondent No.1 is present. It appears that the appellants
are not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
4. The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CM
