- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3976 RFA No. 1804 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1804 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. S.SRIDHAR S/O LATE T.C.SUBBARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/A SANTHRUPTHI NILAYA, VIDYANAGARA EXTENSION, TUMAKURU. 2. SMT. PREMA W/O S.SRIDHAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A SANTHRUPTHI NILAYA, VIDYANAGARA EXTENSION, TUMAKURU. 3. SRI. LOHIT S/O S.SRIDHAR, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/A SANTHRUPTHI NILAYA, VIDYANAGARA EXTENSION, TUMAKURU. 4. SMT. NAVYA D/O S SRIDHAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/A SANTHRUPTHI NILAYA, VIDYANAGARA EXTENSION, TUMAKURU. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.N.SURESHA., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3976 RFA No. 1804 of 2023 AND: 1. SMT. POORNIMA W/O RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/A 'GANGOTRI', 1ST MAIN, 3RD CROSS, NRUPATUNGA EXTENSION, TUMAKURU. 2. SMT. G.S.BASAVARAJU S/O LATE SIDDALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/A 3RD MAIN ROAD, LAKSHMINIVASA, GANDHINAGARA, TUMAKURU. 3. SMT. POORNIMA W/O RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/A 'GANGOTRI', 1ST MAIN, 3RD CROSS, NRUPATUNGA EXTENSION, TUMAKURU. 4. SMT. GEETHA W/O LATE N.V.VENKATARAMU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/A MADDUR ROAD, KUNIGAL TOWN, 5. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA W/O LATE LANKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/A LAKSHMINIVASA, KADEPETE BEEDI, KYATHASANDRA, TUMAKURU. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3976 RFA No. 1804 of 2023 6. SMT. HEMAVATHI W/O KADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/A KASHI VISHWANATHA NILAYA, 2ND MAIN ROAD, HANUMANTHAPURA, TUMAKURU. 7. S.KRISHNAMURHTY S/O T.C.SUBBARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/A MARUTHI NILAYA, 7TH CROSS, GANGOTHRI NAGARA, HANUMANTHAPURA, TUMAKURU. 8. SMT. PRABHAVATHI, W/O RAMAKRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/A DOOR NO.548, EAST 3RD LINE, SIT COLONY, K.R.PURAM COLONY, BENGALURU. …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 appellants has appeared in person and sought time to comply with the office objections. This Court is not inclined to grant time. The reason is plain. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed before Registrar (P & H) on several dates and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3976 RFA No. 1804 of 2023 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 two weeks 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 27.01.2025. The appeal is listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of office objections’. Despite granting sufficient time, the appellants have not complied with the office objections. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. In view of peremptory order dated 08.01.2025, the appeal is dismissed for non- compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP,TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7