IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA R.S.A. NO. 1626/2016 (DEC-INJ) BETWEEN:
SRI. C. P. KRISHNA, S/O SRI. R. CHANNIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT LEMPEGOWDANA KOPPALU VILLAGE, BANNUR HOBLI, T.NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU – 571 101. ... APPELLANT (By SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P. M., ADV.) AND:
1. SMT. SOWKATH, W/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT ANKANAHALLI NEW EXTENSION, BANNUR HOBLI, T.NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU – 571 101.
2. SRI. HASEEBA, S/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT ANKANAHALLI NEW EXTENSION, BANNUR HOBLI, T.NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU – 571 101.
3. SMT. FATHIMA, D/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT ANKANAHALLI NEW EXTENSION, BANNUR HOBLI, T.NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU – 571 101.
4. SRI. MOHAMMED PEER, S/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/AT ANKANAHALLI NEW EXTENSION, BANNUR HOBLI, T. NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU – 571 101.
5. SMT. ASIYABANU, D/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, R/AT ANKANAHALLI NEW EXTENSION, BANNUR HOBLI, T.NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU – 571 101.
6. SMT. MUTHAMMA, W/O LATE SIDDAIAH @ NANJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT ANKANAHALLI NEW EXTENSION, BANNUR HOBLI, T.NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU – 571 101.
7. SRI.MAYIGOWDA, S/O DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT GUDDDADAKOPPALU VILLAGE, BANNUR HOBLI, T.NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU-57101.
... RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.04.2016 PASSED IN R.A.NO.360/2013 ON THE FILE OF III ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.07.2013 PASSED IN O.S.NO.143/2001 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC., T.NARASIPURA..
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T On 11.04.2017, the appellant was granted a week’s time to comply with the office objections with a condition, failing to comply the office objections, the appeal shall stand dismissed.
2. Even to this day, office objections are not complied with. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non- compliance of office objections.
SD/- JUDGE PMR/-