IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY R.F.A.No.624 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
Ms. Sharvani G. Hegde, Aged about 21 years, Daughter of Ganapathi N. Hegde, Residing at ground Floor, No.373, Second Stage, Second Phase, West of Chord Road, Bangalore – 560 086.
…Appellant (By Sri. Venkatramana M.K., Advocate - Absent) AND:
1. Smt. Vijaya G. Hegde, Aged about 61 years, Daughter of late Narasimha Hegde, Residing at First Floor, No.373, Second Stage, Second Phase, West of Chord Road, Bangalore. 560 086.
2. Sri. Ganapathi G. Hegde, Aged about 66 years, Son of late Narasimha V. Hegde, Residing at First Floor, No.373, Second Stage, Second Phase, West of Chord Road, Bangalore. 560 086.
3. Union of India, Asset Recovery Branch, No.583/584, Second Floor, Pooja Complex, Avenue Road, Bangalore – 560 002.
Represented by its Authorised Officer.
4. The Federal Bank Limited, No.24, Second Cross, Gandhinagar, Bangalore – 560 009.
Represented by its Authorised Officer.
**** …Respondents This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, praying to call for records in O.S.No.3306/2015 on the file of the XXXIX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore; set aside the order and decree dt.16.04.2015 passed by the XXXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, passed therein and by allowing the above appeal and consequently allow the suit filed by the appellant in O.S.No.3306/2015, in the interest of justice and equity.
This Regular First Appeal coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Called again in the third round in the afternoon session. None appear for the appellant.
2. A perusal of the case file would show that this appeal is of the year 2016 and inspite of granting sufficient opportunities, even as finally also, the appellant has not complied the office objections. The cause list shows that for fifth time, the appellant has not complied the office objections.
3. On 24-09-2018, this Court while granting a week’s time finally to comply office objections, had made it clear that in case the office objections are not complied within the said period, the appeal will be dismissed for non-prosecution. Despite such order also, the appellant has not evinced any interest in complying office objections. As such, the appeal stands dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.
Sd/- JUDGE BMV*