IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 123 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
S. KRISHNAPPA SON OF SONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDENT OF AT MUDUVATHI VILLAGE, VOKKALERI HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. D. M. MANJUNATH., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND:
V. NARAYANASWAMY SON OF VENKATARAMANAPPA, RESIDENT OF MUDUVATHI VILLAGE, VOKKALERI HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENT THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 12.10.2017 PASSED IN R.A. NO. 82/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CJM KOLAR, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.02.2016 PASSED IN OS.NO. 602/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., KOLAR.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Judgment None appears for the appellant. This Court on 13.09.2019 had adjourned the appeal granting three weeks time for compliance with the office objections subject to the condition that the appeal would be listed for dismissal if there is failure to comply with the office objections. Despite this peremptory order, the office objections have not been complied with. It is obvious that the concerned is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed for default.
SD/- JUDGE nv Ct:sr