Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28244 (KAR)

SMT. C. V. RAJAMMA @ RAJESHWARI v. SRI. THERADI MUTTU ALIAS S.T. MUTTU

RFA/1478/2023 · 2025-01-23

Jyoti Mulimani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3002 RFA No. 1478 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1478 OF 2023 (SP) BETWEEN: SMT. C.V.RAJAMMA @ RAJESHWARI, W/O H.V.UMESH, AGED 54 YEARS, NO.119/16, 5TH CROSS, 13TH MAIN, PRAKASH NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 021. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. N.SURESHA., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: SRI. THERADI MUTTU ALIAS S.T. MUTTU, S/O G.SHANMUGA NADA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT NO.1190, 5TH CROSS, 13TH MAIN, PRAKASH NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 021. …RESPONDENT 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: ORAL ORDER When the case is called, the appellant is not represented. When the case is listed and is called out, the advocate must be present. His absence may affect the case. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3002 RFA No. 1478 of 2023 As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed before Registrar (P & H) on several dates and sufficient time was granted to comply with the office objections. Again the appeal was listed before the Court and sufficient time was granted to comply with the office objections. Once again the appeal was listed on 08.01.2025, on that day, finally a week's time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which the office was directed to list the appeal under the caption ‘for dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of office objections’ on 23.01.2025. The appeal is listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of office objections’. Despite granting sufficient time, the appellant has not complied with the office objections. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. In view of peremptory order dated 08.01.2025, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution and also for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3