The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the writ petition as having become infructuous based solely on the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner regarding the status of the petition. No substantive legal proposition was discussed or established.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017
BEFORE
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
WRIT PETITION No.100101/ 2014 (GM-CPC)
Between:
������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������� ����������������������� �����!����"����� #����������������$ … Petitioner
(By Shri A.S.Patil, Advocate)
And:
�����%�%���"���&��������%���"����������'������ ������(��������������������������������� ������������)�������� �����!����"������#����������������$ … Respondent
(By Shri R.B.Hiremath, Advocate for caveator/respondent)
�������������������������������������+�����,������� -���������������)������./�0�����1�������2����������������������� ������.0$0/$0.(�����������)$�$3�$))����������������������������� 0,$.$0.(��������41��������54��������������-�"����������!����"���� ���67��������-����3�$��80.*������������7����9#�:�;���������"��1 �������$�
This petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group, this day, the Court made the following:
: 2 :
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition may be dismissed as having become infructuous.
The submission of the learned counsel is placed on record.
The writ petition is dismissed as having become
infructuous.
Sd/JUDGE
Jm/-
Undecipherable due to OCR
Undecipherable due to OCR
Anand Byrareddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
