Sri. Prabhuraj D.Ambli S/O … vs Smt. Sulabha Srinivas W/O Sri. … on 23 August, 2010

R.F.A.NO.1091/2009 AND
1VEISC.CVL.20272/2009 8: 3826/2010

IN THE PHGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE;

DATED TI-HS TI-IE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2010'  -A 

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUsT1cE.I-I;G.12Ar;)5."1-§: s:t§'--'1, A   

R.F.A.NO. 1091 /2oo9.G T ' 
   " ' G 
MISC.CVL.Nos.20272/2(§0§;1_,"8;V 382-6120103

BETWEEN:

1. PRABHURAJ DAMBL1  '
AGED ABOUT, 38' YEARS;

S/O. DURApz*;NI:A'yyA M. AAJEB  

2. RESHMI   _  A  *
AGEI)_,AA1BOUA*r_35~1:.{_EARs'  ' 
W/O, PRABHURAJ AMBL1 _

BOTH  R/O.NAO".~304. 1. 

ARCHANA I;NcLAV1'~:g _ "

PRAsHANTHANAGAR'..V '

1sR;O«vLAYOU";-._ ' ' -

BANGALORE A '560,.__Q_7.8.  APPELLANTS

 {BYSRI  PASHA, ADV.)

 _ 1. sULABH'A.$R1§\1IvAs

 AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
' _ W/O.'L.R.SRINIVAS

. * KARTHIK SRINIVAS
'AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
 S/O. L.R.SRiNIVAS

A2" .« 



_g_

R.F.A.NO.1091 /2009 AND
1V.{ISC.CVL.20272/2009 & 3825/20 10

BOTH ARE R/AT.NO.298
NEELADRI 1 1T" CROSS, 25'?" MAIN
J .P.NAGAR 1ST PHASE
BANGALORE -- 560 078
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT

B.G.I, I-IIMAGIRI GREEN

FOREST AP'1'S.,

VINAYAKANAGAR

"rm PHASE, J.P.NAGAR   '-- _  _ ~ 
BANGALORE-« 560 078.  _   RESPONDENTS -

{BY SRI A.C.D'SOUZA, ADV. FOR  '   . -- 
SR1 JOSE SAEASTIAN, ADV. FOR 1_"<~.1_AND 2)   

THIS RFA IS FILED U/S. 96(2'{ OFEE'-CDC" AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND .DECREE...DATED18;4.2cIO9" PASSED IN
O.S.NO.271o8/2002' ON THE. FILE O.I3"..TIIE:3;III ADDL. CITY
CIVIL JUDGE, MAY?O'HAL'L.& UNIT, BANGALORE, DECREEING
THE SUIT FOR"FERMA1\TEN'TI_NJUN€_3'1E.QN. .

MIvSC';CVI,".j202'r*2;*2OOE9=.IS FILED" U/O.XLI RULE 5 R/W
SEC 151 OF_CPi;, _4PRAY--ING.TO PASS AN INTERIM ORDER
STAYING».FURII~IER.fI2ROCEED~INGS IN THE EXE. PETITION
NO.25I47/'Z009, PEN'DING'.'IIIE FILE OF 13TH ADDL. CITY
CIVIL JUDGE__, 'I{CCR:.No.221,"_MAYO HALL UNIT, BANGALORE,
UNTIL VDISPOSAI, OFTHE=APPEAL.

IVII?SC.CI.rL.3S2E]"2O10 IS FILED U/SECS OF THE

 LX113/I'ITjV¥FEON,AC'F, PRAYING TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 112
'DAES IN THIS APPEAL.

TH_IS~ AEFPEEAL AND MISC.CVL APPLICATIONS COMING
ON F'vf)R"_ORDERS THIS DAY, COURT DELIVERED THE

 - v .  '--FOLLOWING:



-3-

R.F.A.NO. 1091 /2009 AND
%VIESC.C\/1.20272 /2009 81 3826/ 20 1 O

JUDGMENT

Heard. Perused the affidavit filed in suppo;It’«bf: A’

application for condonation of the delay ‘

appeal. In my opinion, the cause

acceptable to condone the ino1″dj_nate”dve:i’ay of dthagnu”

three months (112 days]
Misc.Cv1.3826/2010 fi1’e;:_r_i._.”fo’1’ of delay is
accordingly rejected. fails and
is dismissed, of the appeal,
of interim stay is
also t. ‘H
é ‘

TSUDGE

p – . p’ .,