Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16894 (KAR)

SRI. AJIT MATHEWS v. SRI. NAGI REDDY

RFA/338/2024 · 2025-01-28

Jyoti Mulimani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3894 RFA No. 338 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. 338 OF 2024 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: SRI. AJIT MATHEWS SON OF T.M.VARGHESE, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 22/3, 4TH MAIN, MATHIKERE, BANGALORE-560 054. BY HIS GPA HOLDER, SRI T.M.VARGHESE, SON OF LATE T.C.MATHULLA, RESIDING AT NO. 22/3, 4TH MAIN, MATHIKERE, BANGALORE-560 054. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.SRINIVAS., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. NAGI REDDY SON OF SANGATA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.58, MATHRULAYA BALAJI LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 015. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ANAND.A., ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CPC, 1908. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3894 RFA No. 338 of 2024 ORAL ORDER Counsel for the appellant has appeared in person and submits that short accommodation may be granted to comply with the office objections. This Court is not inclined to grant time. The reason is simple. 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. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular First Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40