- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:42701 MFA No. 2509 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2509 OF 2022 (ISA) BETWEEN: 1. AQIL PASHA S/O ABDUL WAHAB AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO.7, 3RD ‘E’ MAIN ROAD RAMAIAH LAYOUT KAMMANAHALLI BENGALURU 560 084 2. PARVEEN AQIL W/O AGIL PASHA R/AT NO.7, 3RD ‘E’ MAIN ROAD RAMAIAH LAYOUT KAMMANAHALLI BENGALURU 560 084 3. TUBA ANAM (MINOR GIRL CHILD) D/O SHAFIDDUIN SHADAB [APPELLANT NOS.1 AND 2 DECLARED AS GUARDIAN UNDER GWC ACT, 1890] …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SOHANI S HOLLA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MOHAMMED MASIHUDDIN S/O LATE KHAJA TAHIR PRESHMAM Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:42701 MFA No. 2509 of 2022 AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS R/AT NO.8, 6TH MAIN, 1ST CROSS KAMADHENU NAGAR B NARAYANAPURA BENGALURU 560 016 2. QAMAR JAMSHED BEGAM W/O MOHAMMED MASIHUDDIN AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/AT NO.8, 6TH MAIN, 1ST CROSS KAMADHENU NAGAR B NARAYANAPURA BENGALURU 560 016 …RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.384 OF INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DT.27.02.2019 PASSED IN P AND SC NO.92/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE XVI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER This Court vide order dated 19.07.2024 observed that matter is listed for non-compliance of office objections for fifth time and the counsel for the appellants again sought for time and time was granted to comply with the - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:42701 MFA No. 2509 of 2022 office objections on cost of Rs.2,000/- and also made it clear that if cost is not paid and office objections are not complied, the appeal will be listed for dismissal. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that cost of Rs.2,000/- has paid and valuation slip is awaited, hence, could not comply with the office objections. On verification, it discloses that still there are four office objections except valuation slip and none of them are complied. This appeal of the year 2022. Inspite of the order dated 19.07.2024, the counsel for the appellants has not made any efforts to comply with the office objections when the matter is listed for six times for compliance of office objections. Hence, it appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the matter diligently. Thus, in view of the order dated 19.07.2024, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN