Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 27872 Kant
Judgement Date : 20 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:47081
RSA No. 1572 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1572 OF 2021 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
SRI. V. ARAVIND,
S/O M.E. VENKATAMUNI,
AGE ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT BUSALAKUNTE,
MULBAGAL TOWN,
KOLAR DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. PUSHPANJALI R., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHESHADRI N.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. B.M. ERAPPA,
Digitally
signed by S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA,
SUNITHA K S AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS,
Location: R/AT BUSALAKUNTE,
HIGH COURT
OF MULBAGAL TOWN,
KARNATAKA KOLAR DISTRICT.
2. SRI. M.E. VENKATMUNI,
S/O ERAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/AT BUSALAKUNTE,
MULBAGAL TOWN,
KOLAR DISTRICT.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:47081
RSA No. 1572 of 2021
3. SRI. M.E. CHANDRAPPA
S/O ERAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT MUTHYALPET,
MULBAGAL TOWN,
KOLAR DISTRICT.
4. SMT. VENKATALAKSHMAMMA,
D/O WRAPPA,
W/O GANTALAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT BUSALAKUNTE,
MULBAGAL TOWN,
KOLAR DISTRICT.
5. SRI. ABDUL RAHAMAN
S/O BABASAB,
AGE ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/AT HYDARNAGAR,
MULBAGAL TOWN,
MULBAGAL TALUK.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.09.2019
PASSED IN RA.No.88/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT JUDGE, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 14.03.2018
PASSED IN OS No.245/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, MULBAGAL.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:47081
RSA No. 1572 of 2021
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal was filed on 08.02.2021. Office has raised
certain objections. The matter was listed before the Court on
28.10.2024, 28.06.2024 and on 18.01.2024. Though sufficient
time was granted and inspite of imposing cost, the appellant is
not complying the office objections.
2. Today the matter is listed for the sixth time for
compliance of the office objections. Learned Counsel for the
appellant submits that the appellant is not responding to the
call. Counsel's submission is placed on record.
3. Though the appeal is of the year 2021, the
appellant has not complied with the office objections. It seems
that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of
office objections.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE JJ
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!