Karnataka High Court
Smt. Manjula vs Smt. Rangamma on 24 November, 2021
Author: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
Bench: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No. 1834 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. MANJULA
W/O SAMPATH
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/A EACHENGURU VILLAGE
YADAVANAHALLI POST,
ANEKAL TALUK
BENGALURU
2. SMT LAKSHMI DEVI
W/O VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/A BALAGURUNAHALLI VILLAGE
NERALURU POST,
ATTIBELE TALUK
3. SRI VENU GOPAL
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/A NALURUHALLI VILLAGE
WHITEFIELD POST,
K R PURAM HOBLI,
BENGALURU.
4. SMT SHUBHA LAKSHMI
W/O DEVARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
RFA No. 1834/2018
2
R/A BELIGERE VILLAGE
MUCHANDRA POST,
HOSAKOTE TALUK
BENGALURU.
5. SMT SUMITHRA
W/O VENKATESH,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/A CHIKKA BYALAKERE VILLAGE,
SHIVAKOTE POST,
HESARAGHATTA HOBLI,
BENGALURU
6. SRI VASANTH KUMAR
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
R/A NALURAHALLI VILLAGE,
WHITEFIELD POST,
K R PURAM
BENGALURU ... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI JAYARAM.V. AND
SRI GOUTHAM.N., ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. SMT. RANGAMMA
SINCE DEAD DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED
04.10.2016 IN O.S NO 4554/2014)
2. SRI M.SHYAM PRASAD CHAUDHARY
S/O M. MADHU RAO,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/A # 18, BALLARY ROAD,
SADHASHIVANAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560080
RFA No. 1834/2018
3
REP BY HIS GPA HOLDER
SRI SUDHARSHAN
S/O JANAKIRAN
...RESPONDENTS
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 96 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.11.2018 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.4554/2014 ON THE FILE OF XXII ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-7),
PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION,
PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION AND ETC.,
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING
ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING /
PHYSICAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
None appeared for the appellants in the matter either physically or through video conference.
2. A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that the appeal is of the year 2018. In spite of granting several and sufficient opportunities, even as a last chance, the appellants have not complied the office objections. Sufficient opportunities of five times have been granted to the appellants which they have not utilised. RFA No. 1834/2018 4
3. On 21.04.2021, this Court while granting a week's time to comply the office objections as prayed, has made it clear that, as a last chance, the said opportunity was given, however, this Court had imposed a cost of `1,000/- payable by the appellants to the Karnataka Advocates Clerks' Benevolent Trust, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru and file an acknowledgement about the payment of cost in the registry.
4. In spite of the same, the appellants have neither complied the office objections nor paid the cost, nor even shown any reasons for non-compliance and not even appeared before the Court either physically or through video conference. As such, it can be inferred that the appellants are neither interested in prosecuting the matter nor willing to comply the office objections.
5. In view of the above, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-compliance of office objections, as well for non-prosecution.
RFA No. 1834/20185
However, the beneficiary of the cost i.e., the Karnataka Advocates Clerks' Benevolent Trust, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru, is at liberty to enforce the said order as a civil decree for its execution in the manner known to law before the competent Court.
Registry to transmit a copy of this order to the Karnataka Advocates Clerks' Benevolent Trust, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru, forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE mbb