Manjula vs V Ranganath
2024 Latest Caselaw 6539 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Manjula vs V Ranganath on 5 March, 2024

Author: K.Natarajan

Bench: K.Natarajan

                                          -1-
                                                   NC: 2024:KHC:9158
                                                RFA No. 2089 of 2017




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                      DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
                                     BEFORE

                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

                     REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2089 OF 2017

             BETWEEN:

             1.    MANJULA
                   D/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH,
                   AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

             2.    DAKSHYANI
                   D/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH,
                   AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

             3.    SHASHIKALA
                   D/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH,
                   AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

             4.    MADAMMA
                   W/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH
                   AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS,
Digitally
signed by    5.    RENUKAIAH
SHAKAMBARI
Location:          S/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH
HIGH COURT         AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
OF
KARNATAKA
                   ALL ARE RESIDING AT:
                   HEGGADAGERE VILLAGE,
                   BIDADI HOBLI,
                   NANDAGUDI HOBLI,
                   RAMANAGARA TALUK.

                                                    ...APPELLANTS
             (BY SRI. KRISHNEGOWDA B D., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
                              -2-
                                           NC: 2024:KHC:9158
                                        RFA No. 2089 of 2017




AND:

1.   V RANGANATH
     S/O LATE R. VARADAREDDY,
     R/AT NO.1203,8TH CROSS,
     CHANDRA LAYOUT,
     VIJAYANAGAR,
     BANGALORE-560 040.

2.   K GANESH BABU
     S/O LATE KRISHNAMURTHY SETTY,
     R/AT NO.26/1-1,
     2ND CROSS,M.T.LAYOUT,
     MALLESHWARAM 13TH CROSS,
     BANGALORE-560 003.

                                             ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.KUMAR S.J.ADV. FOR R2
R1 DISMISSED V/O/DATED 13.06.2023)


     THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.01.2017
PASSED ON I.A.NO.V IN O.S.NO.320/2013 ON THE FILE OF
THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RAMANAGARA,
ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.V FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11(d)
R/W SEC.151 OF CPC.

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

Counsel for the appellant has remained absent.

Respondent's counsel is present.

2. This matter has come up before this Court for

several times for non-compliance of office objections. This is

NC: 2024:KHC:9158

10th time it is listed for non-compliance of office objections. He

has remained continuously absent on the previous dates of

hearing. Appellants' counsel is not present today also.

3. This matter is pending for removing office

objections since 2017 almost for the last 7 years. Appellant is

not evincing interest in prosecuting the case.

4. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for default as well

as for non-compliance of office objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sk/-