IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY R.F.A.No.248 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
Ms.Adina Cuxton Aged about 36 years, D/o Mr.Eldred Charles John Cuxton R/at 3rd Floor, Maruthi Nilaya, Behind Sneha Bakery, Doddakannehalli, Sarjapur Road, Carmalaram P.O., Bangalore-560v035. .. Appellant ( By Smt.Shobha Bhavikatti, Advocate ) AND:
M/s.Indus International School A Division of M/s.Indus Trust, A registered Trust under the Indian Trusts Act, 1881, Billapura Cross, Sarjapur Bangalore-562 125, By its CEO And authorized Signatory Lt.Gen. Arjun Ray, PVSM, VSM. .. Respondent ( By Smt.B.V.Nidhishree, Advocate ) This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 8.11.2013, passed in O.S.No.3769/2011, on the file of XIX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, decreeing the suit for recovery of money.
This Regular First Appeal coming on for Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Learned counsel for the appellant absent.
Learned counsel for the respondent alone present.
2.The appeal is of the year 2014. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the appellant is not evincing any interest in addressing their arguments in the matter.
3. On 15.10.2019, this Court made the following observations in this matter :
“ Called again in the afternoon.
Learned counsel for appellant absent.
Learned counsel for respondent alone present.
As a final opportunity, a week’s time is granted making it clear that in case the learned counsel does not address his arguments on the next date of hearing, the Court may pass appropriate order including dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution.
List the matter in the next week.”
Despite the above, when the matter was taken up on 13.11.2019, learned counsel for the appellant has remained absent. Today, when the matter is called, learned counsel for the appellant is absent and learned counsel for the respondent alone present. This clearly go to show that the appellant is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the matter by addressing the arguments.
As such, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE bk/