Dismissed
Sri Nanjamariyappa v. State of Karnataka
Karnataka HCWP/2337/2012
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS…
What the court decided
AI extract
COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS…
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 AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021 BEFORE
THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 2337 OF 2012 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. V.B. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE(ABSENT)
AND:
2
M.S. BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. A.R. SRINIVAS, AGA FOR R1 & R2 (through PH) SRI. D.R. RAJASHEKHARAPPA, ADVCOATE FOR R1 & R2 (through PH)
SRI. B.C. GURU, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:06.06.2011 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-K DIRECT THE AUTHORITIES TO PUT THE PETITONERS IN POSSESSION OF THE SITES IN QUESTION BY EVICTING THE 3RD RESPONDENT FORTHWITH IN COMPLIANCE OF THE ORDER DTED:31.03.1997 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONR, BANGALORE DISTRICT WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE -F AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Though this Writ Petition was called out twice in the day, there was no appearance for the petitioners. On the last date, i.e., on 29.11.2021, the case was adjourned and it was made clear that no further adjournment would be granted on the next date of hearing.
Sd/JUDGE
bnv* ct-nn
SRI. NANJAMARIYAPPA S/O RAGHAVAIAH
SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU
STATE OF KARNATAKA
THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE NORTH(ADDITIONAL)
SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O SRI. V. GOPALAIAH
R.NATARAJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court