- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17424-DB MFA No. 4224 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4224 OF 2017 (GW) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. WAZEER B.M. S/O. LATE SHEIK MOIDEEN SAB, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, ARABIC TEACHER, R/AT BEHIND RIVERA HOTEL, TOWN COMPOUND, BUNDER, MANGALURU-575 001. 2. MRS. RAMIZA BI W/O. LATE SHEIK MOIDEEN SAB, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT BEHIND RIVERA HOTEL, TOWN COMPOUND, BUNDER, MANGALURU-575 001. 3. MRS. PARVEEN TAJ W/O. RASHEEDULLAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT BEHIND RIVERA HOTEL, TOWN COMPOUND, BUNDER, MANGALURU-575 001. …APPELLANTS (APPELLANTS 1 TO 3 ARE UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17424-DB MFA No. 4224 of 2017 AND: 1. SRI. IMTIYAZ S/O. PWD KHALEEL SAB, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT TAVAREKERE, CHENNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 002. 2. SRI. NAWAB S/O. PWD KHALEEL SAB, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, MAISTRY (MASON), R/AT TAVAREKERE, CHENNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 002. 3. SRI. SHAFI S/O. PWD KHALEEL SAB, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT TAVAREKERE, CHENNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 47(a) OF G & W ACT READ WITH UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY COURT ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.03.2017 PASSED ON G&WC NO.18/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, D.K., MANGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 7&10 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT (RULE NO.5 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT, 1890, (KARNATAKA RULES). THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17424-DB MFA No. 4224 of 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) No one appears for the appellants. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent is present. 3. The office report is that the Court notice, which was issued to the appellants, was returned with shara that notice to appellant Nos.1 to 3 is unserved as they were not available at the address given. 4. It appears that the appellants are not interested to pursue this appeal. The appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11