- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1775 RFA No. 1918 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1918 OF 2022 (DEC/POS) BETWEEN: 1. SMT K RANI W/O LATE SRI. P.SUNDARAM, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR'S SMT. SELVI.S AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, W/O SRI. SRINIVAS, 2. SMT. GEETHA W/O SRI. GAUTHAM AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 3. SMT. S KAVITHA W/O SRI. P RAVI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 4. SMT. KALPANA S W/O SRI SARAVANA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, 5. SMT. SHEELA W/O SRI. RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, APPELLANTS 1 TO 5 ARE R/AT NO. 3, HOUSE LIST NO. 1261 KATHA NO. 159, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, 54th CROSS, LAGGERE VILLAGE, YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 058. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. G.B.NANDISH GOWDA., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1775 RFA No. 1918 of 2022 AND: 1. SMT M H INDIRA @ M H INDIRAMMA W/O SRI. H.G.BOJARAJU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO. 3, LAGGERE VILLAGE, YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI, 5th CROSS, GUNDAPPA LAYOUT, ASHRAMA ROAD, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 058. 2. SRI. L.RAMESH S/O SRI.LAKSHMAIAH, R/AT NO. 708, 11th CROSS, INDIRANAGAR, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010. …RESPONDENTS THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF 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 is called out, the advocate must be present. His absence may affect the case. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the appeal was listed on 06.01.2025, on that day, when the case was called, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants. However, finally a week’s time was granted to comply with the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1775 RFA No. 1918 of 2022 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 16.01.2025. 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 06.01.2025, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution and also for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6