IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.88 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
Sri MUJEEB AHMED formerly known as AHMED BASHA S/o late Mr.Nazeer Ahmed Aged about 24 years No.35, ‘F’ Street Slaughter House Road Bengaluru – 560 051.
(By Sri Ayub Khan K., Advocate - Absent) AND:
1. The Secretary to Government of Karnataka Department of Primary & Secondary Education M.S. Building 6th Floor, Dr. Ambedkar Veedhi Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. The Director Karnataka Secondary Education .. APPELLANT Examination Board 6th Cross, Malleshwaram Bengaluru – 560 003.
3. The Director Department of Pre University Education 18th Cross, Malleshwaram, Sampige Road Bengaluru – 560 012.
4. The Registrar Bangalore University Jnana Bharathi Campus Jnana Bharathi Post Bengaluru – 560 056.
.. RESPONDENTS (By Smt. Jyothi Bhat, HCGP for R1, R2 & R3; Sri Appaji, Advocate for R4) ******** This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of CPC praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree passed by the XXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bengaluru City(CCH-29), dated 13.11.2013 passed in O.S. No.25252/2012 by allowing this appeal in the interest of justice and equity.
This Regular First Appeal coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1 to 3 alone present.
Learned counsel for the appellant absent.
Learned HCGP reiterates her submission made on 11.11.2019 and submits that the appellant is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the matter.
In this appeal of the year 2015, the appellant is required to file paper book in this matter for which purpose, sufficient time was granted to him.
On 11.11.2019, this Court made the following observation:
“Learned counsel for the appellant absent.
Learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1 to 3 alone present and submits that in spite of granting sufficient opportunities, the appellant is not showing any interest in proceeding further in this matter.
A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that in this appeal of the year 2015, on 21.10.2019, noticing the absence of the appellant and the presence of only learned HCGP, on the said date also this Court had granted two weeks' time to the appellant to file the paper book as a final chance. Despite the same, the appellant appears to have not filed the paper book.
However, keeping the best interest in mind, as a last chance, again a week’s time is granted to the appellant making it clear that in case of non filing of paper book within the said period, the Court may proceed to pass appropriate order in this appeal, including dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution.
Registry to list this matter immediately after a week, without delay.”
In spite of the above, even today also, the learned counsel for the appellant has neither appeared and shown reasons for non filing of the paper book nor reported the compliance by filing the paper book. As such, it can be considered that the appellant is not evincing interest in prosecuting the matter.
Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed for non prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE sac*