- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2459 RFA No. 1989 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1989 OF 2023 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: MR. IMRAN KHAN S/O AKBER ALI KHAN, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.1455/3, GOPALAIAH STREET, KABIR ROAD, LAKSHHAR MOHALLA, MYSORE. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NAIK NITYANAND VENKATARAMAN., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. MR.M.ILIAS S/O MR ABDUL BASITH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/A NO.10/11, 2ND CROSS, ARMUGHAM MOUNDILIAR STREET, KALASIPALYAM, BENGALURU-560 002. 2. MR IQBAL PASHA S/O LATE AMEER PASHA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.11, 1ST CROSS, THAPLA BUILDING, DR. TCN RAYAN ROAD, CHELUVADIPALYA, SIDDARTHANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 053. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R.R.DEVENDRA GOWDA., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2459 RFA No. 1989 of 2023 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.Pranav Umesh Nadgi., counsel on behalf of Sri.Naik Nityanand Venkataraman., for the appellant has appeared through video conferencing and submits that short accommodation may be granted to comply with the office objections. 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 the Registrar (P & H) and time was granted to comply with the office objections. Thereafter, the appeal was listed before the Court on 10.01.2025, on that day, finally, two week's time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which the appeal was ordered to be listed under the caption 'for dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of office objections' on 21.01.2025. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2459 RFA No. 1989 of 2023 The appeal is listed today under the caption 'for dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of office objections'. Despite granting sufficient time, the office objections are not complied with. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular First Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18