High Court of Karnataka Bench dismissed Writ Petition No.103388/2016 filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, holding that the petition had become infructuous due to subsequent developments.
Petition dismissed as infructuous.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO.103388/2016 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PATIL MH AND SRI. V.S. GADDAD, ADVOCATES)
AND
... RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND III
2
JMFC, HUBBALLI ON IA NO.45 DATED 14.3.2016 IN OS NO.38/2012 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
in view of subsequent developments, the writ petition has become infructuous.
Submission is placed on record. Writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
SD/JUDGE
JTR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition has become infructuous in view of subsequent developments.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Mr. Hanumantagouda S/o Shivanagouda Patil
Mr. Rayanagouda S/o Basanagouda Patil
Sri. Mangesh S/o Anantrao Aghanashini
M/s. Sapna @ Sanku D/o Hanumantagouda Patil
S.G. Pandit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
