Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sayyedbegum W/O. Mainuddin Soudagar vs Parikshith S/O. Vijayanand Kelagadi on 2 November, 2022

Author: Suraj Govindaraj

Bench: Suraj Govindaraj

                          :1:



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNA TAKA
                  DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED TH IS THE 11 T H DAY OF JULY 2016


                       BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR.JUS TICE A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA


                R.F.A.NO.100224/2015

BETWEEN:

VIJAYANAND S/O .VENKA TESH KELAGADI
AGE: 49 YEARS , OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. MIG 90/1 KARNA TAKA HOUSING
BOARD COLONY,
CHANNAPETH OLD HUBLI, HUBLI,
DIST: DHARWAD.
                                        ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI SACHIN S. MAGADUM, ADVOCATE.)

AND

1.    PARIKASHITH S/O VIJAYANAND KELAGADI
      AGE: 18 YEARS , OCC: S TUDENT
      R/O: C/O.RAMCHANDRA NAIK
      2 N D MAIN MAHALAXMI MAGAR BA TAVAID
      TUMAKURU-3
      REP. BY NA TURAL GUARDIAN/
      RESPONDENT NO.2
      SMT.VIJAYALAXMI
      W/O VIJAYANAND KELAGADI
      AGE: 41 YEARS , OCC: HOUSE WIFE
      R/O: C/O.RAMCHANDRA NAIK
      2 N D MAIN MAHALAXMI NAGAR
      BATAVAID , TUMAKURU-3

2.    SMT.VIJAYALAXMI
      W/O. VIJAYANAND KELAGADI
      AGE: 41 YEARS , OCC: HOUSE WIFE
      R/O: C/O.RAMCHANDRA NAIK
      2 N D MAIN MAHALAXMI MAGAR BA TAVAID
      TUMAKURU-3
                                :2:




3.   SMT.SARASWA TI CALLING HERSELF AS
     W/O VIJAYANAND KELAGADI
     AGE: 40 YEARS , OCC: HOUSE WIFE
     R/O: MIG 90/1 KARNA TAKA HOUSING
     BOARD COLONY
     CHANNAPETH OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI
     DIST: DHARWAD-580001

4.   SMT.SAYYEDBEGUM
     W/O MAINUDDIN SOUDAGAR
     AGE: 46 YEARS , OCC: RELIG IOUS PEACHER
     R/O: DOODANAN DARGA, TORAVI HAKKAL
     HUBBALLI, DIS T: DHARWAD-580001

                                            ... RESPONDENTS

     THIS REGULAR FIRS T APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RU LE 1 READ WITH S ECTION 96 OF CPC,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE TH E JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DARTED 05.07.2014, PASSED IN O.S .NO.32/2012, BY
THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBLI, BY
ALLOWING TH IS APPEAL, ETC.,.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR O RDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                        JUDGMENT

Sri Scahin S. Magadum, learned Advocate submits that despite depositing the cost and the appellant being notified, there is no co-operation to comply with the office objections. Since sufficient time has already been granted for compliance of office objections, the appellant being not diligent, and as he is stated to have :3: been not extended the co-operation to his learned Advocate, I have no other alternative except to dismiss the appeal for non prosecution, despite the learned Advocate Sri Sachin Magadum seeking further time. Hence the appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE Mrk/-