The High Court of Karnataka listed the writ petition for hearing; however, the petitioner's counsel remained absent on both listed dates, resulting in the dismissal of the petition for non-prosecution.
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 13T H DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
WRIT PETITION NO.68784/2010 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
NABIRSUL S/O ABDULSAHEB JAMADAR, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOTE.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI RAJENDRA C DESAI, ADVOCATE (ABSENT.)
AND:
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP, FOR R.1; SRI ANIL KALE, ADVOCATE, FOR R.2; R.3 – NOTICE SERVED, UNREPRESENTED.)
2
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.2 TO REMOVE THE ROAD LAID IN PETITIONER'S PROPERTY AS PER ANNEXURE-B IN L.S.NO.4787B/53 AND TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.1 TO REGISTER FIR AND INVESTIGATE THE CASE AGAINST RESPONDENT NO.3, ETC.,.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B-GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition was listed on 6.2.2020 and when the matter was called, the petitioner’s counsel remained absent and therefore, the matter was ordered to be listed on 13.2.2020. This day, when the matter is called during the pre-lunch session, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Though the matter is called once again during the post-lunch session, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non prosecution.
SD/JUDGE
Mrk/-
Nabirsul S/o Abdulsaheb Jamadar
The PSI, Town Police Station, Jamkhandi
City Municipal Corporation, Jamkhandi, Dist. Bagalkote
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
