IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO R.F.A.No.899/2005 BETWEEN:
A RAFI AHMED S/O LATE AKBAR SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIR 1. SMT. S H MEHURURNNISA W/O LATE A RAFI AHMED, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.
2 . SRI VAJEED AHMED R A S/O LATE A RAFI AHMED, MUSLIM AGED 39 YEARS.
3 . SMT.YASMEEN BANU W/O SRI ASLAM ALI AND D/O LATE A RAFI AHMED.
4. SRI SAJEED AHMED. R.A. S/O LATE A RAFI AHMED 1 TO 4 NAMED ABOVE ARE ALL RESIDING AT HOUSE No.65, III CROSS, I STAGE KIRLOSKAR COLONY,WEST OF CHORD ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 079.
(BY SRI N SUBBA SHASTRY - ABSENT) ...APPELLANTS AND:
1 . P VARADARAJU S/O SRI P VENKATADRI HINDU, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT No.10, PLATFORM ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 020.
SINCE DECEASED ON 11.11.2008 REPRESENTED BY HIS L.Rs.
1(a) SMT.BAGYAMMAL W/O LATE P VARADARAJU HINDU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
1(b) SRI NAVANEETHA S/O LATE P VARADARAJU HINDU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS.
1(c) SMT.CHAYADEVI D/O LATE P VARADARAJU HINDU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
1(d) SMT.GUNAJOTHI W/O VIJAYAKUMAR HINDU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. D/O LATE P VARADARAJU.
1(e) SMT.RAJESHWARI W/O SRI VASUDEVAN HINDU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT DOOR No.107, L.N. PURAM 10TH ‘A’ CROSS, BANGALORE – 560 021.
2. SMT.SAVITHRAMMA W/O SRI RAJU, HINDU AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDING AT 1243, II STAGE, KAMALANAGAR BANGALORE – 560 079.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI J IMAYAN AND SRI M SIVAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 (a-e), R-2 DISPENSED WITH) THIS RFA IS FILED U/S 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.03.2005 PASSED IN O.S.No.8161/99 ON THE FILE OF THE XIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-28), ALLOWING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION, POSSESSION, INJUNCTION AND MESNE PROFITS.
THIS RFA COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Learned counsel for appellants absent. No representation.
Learned counsel for respondent present.
The appeal is of the year 2005 and of the year 1999 in terms of the original suit. It appears, the appellants have no interest in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE tsn*