- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3887 RFA No. 237 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 237 OF 2024 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. NASREEN SIDDIQUE D/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.18 8TH CROSS, USMAN SAIT LANE DODDAMAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004. 2. SMT. NAVEEN SIDDIQUE D/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.18, 8TH CROSS USMAN SAIT LANE DODDAMAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004. 3. SMT. NOUSHEEN SIDDIQUE D/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.18, 8TH CROSS USMAN SAIT LANE DODDAMAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004. 4. SMT. NOOR AYESHA SIDDIQUE @ NOORI D/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.18, 8TH CROSS USMAN SAIT LANE DODDAMAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3887 RFA No. 237 of 2024 5. SRI BASHEER AHMED SIDDIQUE D/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.18, 8TH CROSS USMAN SAIT LANE DODDAMAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004. 6. SRI AYUB KHAN S/O LATE UMAR KHAN AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.18, 8TH CROSS USMAN SAIT LANE DODDAMAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. V.MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: SMT. REHMAN KHAN SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. 1. SMT. NAYEEMA KHANUM AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS W/O LATE RAHMAN KHAN RESIDING AT NO.7/2, 7TH CROSS LALBAGH FORT ROAD BENGALURU - 560 004. 2. SMT. MAHABOOBBI RAHMAN KHAN AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS D/O LATE RAHMAN KHAN RESIDING AT NO.7/2, 7TH CROSS LALBAGH FORT ROAD BENGALURU - 560 004. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI CHINNAPPA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI B.N.ANANTHANARAYANA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 AND R2) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CPC 1908. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3887 RFA No. 237 of 2024 THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER When the case is called, the appellants are not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed before the Registrar (P & H) and sufficient time was granted to comply with the office objections. Thereafter, the appeal was listed before the Court on 13.01.2025, on that day, finally two week's time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which the appeal was ordered to be listed under the caption 'for dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of office objections' on 28.01.2025 The appeal is listed today under the caption 'for dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of office objections'. Despite granting sufficient time, the office objections are not complied with. As already noted above, when the case is called, the appellants are not represented. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3887 RFA No. 237 of 2024 Regular First Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution and also for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30