- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3004 RFA No. 1850 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. 1850 OF 2023 (PAR/DEC) BETWEEN: SMT AMUDHA VALLI W/O P.VENAKATESH, D/O C JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO 14 'D' STREET, LANGFORD CROSS ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAM MOHAN.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT SARALA DEVI W/O C JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO.955, BDA QUARTERS, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 047. 2. SRI HARISH KUMAR W/O C JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO 955, BDA QUARTERS, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 047. 3. SRI SATHESH KUMAR S/O C JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.955, BDA QUARTERS, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 047. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3004 RFA No. 1850 of 2023 4. SRI KALAI KUMAR.N.J. W/O C JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO.955, BDA QUARTERS, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 047. 5. SRI MOHAN KUMAR J W/O C JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT OLD NO 4, NEW NO 109, B STREET, 2ND FLOOR, JAYARAJNAGAR, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 047. 6. SRI SURESH BABU S/O C JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.31, WEST ROAD, AUSTIN TOWN, BANGALORE-560 047. 7. SMT. SHEELA DEVI W/O RAMA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO 189, MAIN ROAD, AUSTIN TOWN, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 047. …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 Sri.Ram Mohan.A., counsel for the appellant has appeared in person and submits that short accommodation may be granted to comply with the office objections. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3004 RFA No. 1850 of 2023 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 Registrar (P & H) on several dates and sufficient time was granted to comply with the office objections. 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- compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7