- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1777 RFA No. 2165 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. 2165 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. SMT SHYAMALA W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA, AND D/O LATE R.SHAMA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO. 443, 1ST B MAIN, 16TH CROSS, J.P.NAGAR, 4TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078. 2. SMT S.SAVITHA W/O R.SURENDRA AND D/O LATE R.SHAMA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO. 38, KASTURBA NILAYA, BASI REDDY LAYOUT, HOODI, BENGALURU -560 048. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MURUGESH.T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI S.SHASHI KUMAR S/O LATE R.SHAMA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO. 108, 2ND FLOOR, 4TH CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD, R.R.M.R. EXTN, 1ST CROSS, RANGAPPA GARDEN, BENGALURU -560 027. 2. SMT SARASWATHI W/O LATE R.SHAMA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1777 RFA No. 2165 of 2022 3. SRI S.SURENDRA S/O LATE R.SHAMA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 2 AND 3 ARE RESIDING AT NO. 111, 4TH CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD, R.R.M.R.EXTENSION, 1ST CROSS, RANGAPPA GARDEN, BENGALURU -560 027. 4. M/S LANFIN (BANGALORE) PVT LTD., A REGISTERED PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, V.NARAYAN, MAJOR AT AGE, OFFICE AT NO. 108, 4TH CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD, R.R.M.R.EXTENSION, 1ST CROSS, RANGAPPA GARDEN, BENGALURU-560 027. 5. SR. LAKSHMI PRINTERS REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX SMT.JAYANTHI W/O CHIDAMBAR, MAJOR AT AGE. 4 AND 5 HAVING OFFICE AT 108, 4TH CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD, R.R.M.R.EXTENSION, 1ST CROSS, RANGAPPA GARDEN, BENGALURU-560 027. 6. THE SECRETARY, ADI SHKTI TOTAGARARA PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, NO.272/3, 17TH CROSS, THANAPPA GARDEN, ] - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1777 RFA No. 2165 of 2022 SAMPANGIRAMANAGARA, BENGALURU -560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GANGADHAR AITHAL.S., ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CPC, 1908. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ORDER, 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. 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 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1777 RFA No. 2165 of 2022 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.: 10