- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1776 RFA No. 2045 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. 2045 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. SRI CHENGALRAYA S/O GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.689, 2ND MAIN, DOMLUR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 071. 2. SRI RAJA S/O GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.689, 2ND MAIN, DOMLUR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 071. 3. SRI. RAJENDARA S/O GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.689, 2ND MAIN, DOMLUR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 071. 4. SMT. SUJATHA S/O GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.689, 2ND MAIN, DOMLUR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 071. 5. SMT JAYAMMA (SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HER LEGAL HEIR), C S BABU, S/O CHINNA DORI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1776 RFA No. 2045 of 2022 RESIDING AT NO.437, 5TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS, DOMLUR, BENGALURU-560 071. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS.M., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: SRI SABIR AZEEZ S/O ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.11, KSV NILAYA, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052. …RESPONDENT THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 96 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 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 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. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1776 RFA No. 2045 of 2022 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.: 9