- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:57 RFA No. 1915 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1915 OF 2022 (INJ) BETWEEN: 1. P.RAJA S/O POONAVANAM, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, 2. JAYARAM S/O MUNISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, 3. NAMASHIVAYA, S/O VELANDHAR, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 4. LATE M.SUBHAN S/O LATE MUNIYAN, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIRS, CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, SATHYAVENI AGED 24 YEARS, 5. LATE SADASHIVAM.V S/O VEERAMUTHU, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIRS MUNIYAMMA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, SHRIDHAR AGED 44 YEARS, 6. SMT. SUMATHI W/O ANAND, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:57 RFA No. 1915 of 2022 7. DASARATHA S/O LATE CHINNABDORAI, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIRS, NAGAVENI AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, LOKESHWARU AGED 36 YEARS, SURESH.D. AGED 35 YEARS, JAGATHISHWARI AGED 28 YEARS. 8. SMT. MUTHYALAMMA W/O LATE PERUMAL, REPRESENTED BY THE LEGAL HEIRS, SAROJA.K, AGED 48 YEARS, SANTHOSH.P., AGED 43 YEARS, 9. SMT. ANNAPURNAMMA W/O MUNISWAMY, DECEASED REPRESENTED BY THE LEGAL HEIRS MUNISWAMY AGED 80 YEARS, VALLIYAMMA AGED 51 YEARS, SELVI AGED 48 YEARS, 10. SMT. CHINNATHAYAMMA REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIRS, KANYAKUMARI AGED 50 YEARS, MALATHI., AGED 34 YEARS, PARTHIBAN.M., AGED 32 YEARS, PAVITHRA.M., AGED 32 YEARS, SAVITHA.M., AGED 27 YEARS. 11. SRI MURTHY S/O RAJA.P, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:57 RFA No. 1915 of 2022 12. A.RAJA S/O AROGYASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 13. SMT. BABITHA W/O PALANI, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 14. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O LATE JAYAPAL, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, 15. SMT. K.DEVI W/O VIJAY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, THE APPELLANTS NO.1 TO 15 AND THE LEGAL HEIRS ARE RESIDING IN THE RESPECTIVE HOUSES NO.40, 40/A, 40/1, 40/C, 40/B, 40/4, 695/2, 690/3, OPPOSITE LAKSHMAIAH BUILDING, KODIHALLI, H.A.L. MAIN ROAD, J.P.NAGAR POST, BENGALURU-75. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. DHANUSH M., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER), T.CHOWDIAH ROAD, BENGALORE. 2. THE SLUM CLEARANCE BOARD, (REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY), SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENTS - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:57 RFA No. 1915 of 2022 THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF THE CPC,1908. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER When the case is called, the appellants are not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed before Registrar (P & H) and also before the Court on several dates and sufficient time was granted to comply with the office objections. Despite granting time, office objections are not complied with as of today. The appeal is listed today for orders regarding non- compliance of office objections for the sixth time. A perusal of the entire order sheet reveals that despite giving sufficient time, the office objections are not complied with. Furthermore, the appeal is filed in the year 2022. Now we are in the month of January 2025. The appeal is pending for almost three years. As already noted above, when the case is called, the appellants are not represented. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular First - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:57 RFA No. 1915 of 2022 Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution and also for non- compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 50