Honnappa vs S a Murthy - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1889964
CourtKarnataka Orders High Court
Decided OnFeb-05-2024
Case NumberRFA/676/2023
JudgeH.T. Narendra Prasad
AppellantHonnappa
RespondentS a Murthy
Excerpt:
-1-in the high court of karnataka at bengalurudated this the 5th day of february, 2024 before the hon'ble mr justice h.t. narendra prasad regular first appeal no. 676 of 2023 (mon) between: honnappa s/o krishnappa aged about 60 years r/at sri lakshmi venkateshwara krupa raghavendra nagara extension sakaleshpura town …appellant (by sri. girigowda c., advocate [absent])and: s a murthy s/o s h arjun rao aged about 50 years panduranga rice mill digitally signed by hemalatha a malali road location: high raghavendra extension court of karnataka sakaleshpura nagara …respondent this rfa is filed under section 96 of cpc against the judgment and decree dated 12.12.2022 passed in os no.7/2018 on the file of the senior civil judge and jmfc, sakleshpura, dismissing the suit for recovery of money. this appeal, coming on for orders, this day, the court delivered the following: -2-judgmentinspite of granting opportunity for seven times, the office objections have not been complied with.2. even when the matter was posted before the court forcompliance of office objections on 01.02.2024, none appeared for the appellant in both the sessions and office objections have not been complied with and the matter was ordered to be listed on 02.02.2024 at the top of the list for ‘orders’. even on 02.02.2024 also, none appeared for the appellant in both the sessions and the office objections have not been complied with and the matter was ordered to be listed to today at the top of the list under the caption ‘for dismissal’.3. even today also, there is no representation on behalf ofthe appellant in both the sessions and the office objections have not been complied with. it appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.4. hence, the appeal is dismissed for default and non- prosecution. sd/- judge cm
Judgment:

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 676 OF 2023 (MON) BETWEEN: HONNAPPA S/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT SRI LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA KRUPA RAGHAVENDRA NAGARA EXTENSION SAKALESHPURA TOWN …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GIRIGOWDA C., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])

AND: S A MURTHY S/O S H ARJUN RAO AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS PANDURANGA RICE MILL Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A MALALI ROAD Location: High RAGHAVENDRA EXTENSION Court of Karnataka SAKALESHPURA NAGARA …RESPONDENT THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 12.12.2022 PASSED IN OS No.7/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAKLESHPURA, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2-

JUDGMENT

Inspite of granting opportunity for seven times, the office objections have not been complied with.

2. Even when the matter was posted before the Court for

compliance of office objections on 01.02.2024, none appeared for the appellant in both the sessions and office objections have not been complied with and the matter was ordered to be listed on 02.02.2024 at the top of the list for ‘orders’. Even on 02.02.2024 also, none appeared for the appellant in both the sessions and the office objections have not been complied with and the matter was ordered to be listed to today at the top of the list under the caption ‘for dismissal’.

3. Even today also, there is no representation on behalf of

the appellant in both the sessions and the office objections have not been complied with. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

4. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for default and non- prosecution. Sd/- JUDGE CM