IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY R.F.A.No.1414 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
Sri B.N.Varadaraja Setty, Son of B.V.Narasimhamurthy Setty, Aged about 55 years, Residing at Gudemaranahalli, Hand Post, Solur Post, Nelamangala Taluk, Bangalore District-562 127. .. Appellant ( By Sri Siddamallappa P.M., Advocate For Mylaraiah Associates ) AND:
Sri P.Ramamurthy Naidu, Son of Ramakrishna Naidu, Aged about 54 years, Residing at House No.17, Near Sirke Apartment, 80 feet Ring Road, Kengeri Satellite Town, Bangalore-560 060. .. Respondent ( By Sri V.B.Siddaramaiah, Advocate ) This Regular First Appeal is filed under Order 41 Rule 1 read with Section 96 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 2.8.2014, passed in O.S.No.5710/2011, on the file of XIX Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, decreeing the suit filed for recovery of money.
This Regular First Appeal coming on for hearing this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Called again in the third round. None appear in this matter.
2. A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that in this appeal of the year 2014, in spite of granting several and sufficient opportunities, the appellant has not evinced any interest in appearing and addressing the arguments. After granting sufficient time, on 30.10.2019, this Court had made the following observations :
“ Called again in the afternoon in the second round.
None appear in the matter.
In this appeal of the year 2014, the learned counsel for the appellant has neither appeared nor address his arguments.
As such, as a final opportunity, a day’s accommodation is granted, making it clear that in case the learned counsels for the parties fail to address their arguments, the Court would proceed to pass appropriate order in the appeal, including dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution.
List the matter on 31.10.2019.”
Even thereafter, when the matter was taken up on 31.10.2019, learned counsel for the appellant once again remained absent. However, this Court passed over the matter in two rounds and only in the last round, i.e., in the third round, it made once again the following observations :
“ Called again.
None appear in the matter.
Once again as a final opportunity, a short accommodation is granted to the parties making it clear that in case they fail to appear and address their arguments on the next date of hearing, the Court would be constrained to pass appropriate order including dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution.
List the matter on 04.11.2019.”
Despite the above, when the matter is taken up today in two rounds, there is no representation in the matter from either side. As such, it is a clear case wherein it can be inferred that the appellant is not evincing any interest in appearing and proceeding further in this matter.
As such, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE bk/