Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29760 (KAR)

SMT RATHNAMMA v. THE MANDYA NATIONAL PAPER MILLS LTD (IN LIQDN)

OSA/23/2015 · 2025-08-05

D K Singh, Venkatesh Naik T

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR OSA NO. 23/2015 BETWEEN: SMT RATHNAMMA W/O MR. C.D.RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT QUARTERS NO.99/B, M.N.P.M. HOUSING COLONY, BELAGULA – 571 606 MANDYA DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. B. R. UMESHCHANDRA GOWDA, ADVOCATE (ABSENT) AND: 1. THE MANDYA NATIONAL PAPER MILLS LTD (IN LIQN) A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AND MILLS AT BELAGULA – 571 606 REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 12TH FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. MR. GHOUSE KHAN S/O LATE RASUL KHAN AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT QUARTERS NO.99/B M.N.P.M. HOUSING COLONY, 2 BELAGULA – 571 606 MANDYA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K S MAHADEVAN & V .JAYARAM, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI MOHAMMED NIYAZ.S., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS ORIGINAL SIDE APPEAL UNDER SECTION 483 OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956 READ WITH SECTION 4 OF THE HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR TO EXECUTE THE SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT HEREIN IN RESPECT OF QUARTERS NO. 99/B IN LINE WITH THE ORDER DATED 16TH JULY 2004 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT (COMPANY COURT) IN COMPANY APPLICATION NOS. 12/02, 967/02 ETC. ***** THIS OSA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T None appears for the appellant. Even on previous occasion i.e., on 27th May 2019 matter had called twice and there was no representation on behalf of the appellant as such matter came to be adjourned to next week. However, after lapse of ten (10) months, matter has been listed today by the Registry. Even today also there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. Appellant seems to be not interested in 3 prosecuting this appeal. Hence, appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE HR