- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3876 RFA No. 1682 of 2023 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. 1682 OF 2023 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN: SMT. NETRAVATHI W/O GANGADHARA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT HOUSE NO.223 SWAMI VIVEKANANDA BADAVANE 9TH CROSS, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 202 DIST: SHIVAMOGGA. …APPELLANT (BY SRI RAMACHANDRA.R.NAIK., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. LAKSHMI W/O LATE NAGENDARAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT GADIKOPPA POLICE LAYOUT OPPOSITE JEEVANA SANJE RUDRASHRAMA SHIVAMOGGA - 577 202 DIST: SHIVAMOGGA. 2. SRI GANESHA S/O LATE NAGENDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT SWAMI VIVEKANANDA LAYOUT BACK SIDE B.S.N.L GO DOWN SHIVAMOGGA - 577 202 DIST: SHIVAMOGGA. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3876 RFA No. 1682 of 2023 3. SRI RAMESHA S/O LATE NAGENDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT GADIKOPPA POLICE LAYOUT OPPOSITE JEEVANA SANJE RUDRASHRAMA SHIVAMOGGA - 577 202 DIST: SHIVAMOGGA. …RESPONDENTS 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 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 also before the Court and sufficient time was granted to comply with the office objections. Thereafter, the appeal was listed on 08.01.2025, on that day, finally two week's time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which the appeal was ordered to be - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3876 RFA No. 1682 of 2023 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.: 5