- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4374 RFA No. 1822 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1822 OF 2023 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LAKSHMI W/O NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT HONNAGANAHALLI, SATHANUR HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. 2. SMT. PREMAMMA W/O SRI RAJACHARI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT NO.6/7, 1ST MAIN, ANJANAPPA LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGARA 2ND STAGE, BAGNALORE-560 040. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. V.R.BALARAJ., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. THIMMACHARI S/O LATE VENKATACHARI, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, R/AT C/O MARIGOWDA, BEHIND NEW INDIAN SCHOOL, KARIYAPPA LAYOUT, KANAKAPURA TOWN, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4374 RFA No. 1822 of 2023 2. SMT. PUTTAMMA W/O CHIKKASWAMYACHARI, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT KAMMASANDRA DODDI, KABBALA POST, SATHANUR HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. 3. SRI GOPALACHARI S/O LATE VENKATACHARI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O ATTIHALLI VILLAGE, SATHANUR HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANGARA DISTRICT. 4. SRI GARUDACHARI S/O LATE VENKATACHARI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT C/O MARIGOWDA, BEHIND NEW INDIAN SCHOOL, KARIYAPPA LAYOUT, KANAKAPURA TOWN. …RESPONDENTS THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER XLI 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 granted time. The reason is plain. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4374 RFA No. 1822 of 2023 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 09.01.2025, 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 30.01.2025. 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 09.01.2025, the appeal is dismissed for non- compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8