Dismissed
S Purushotham v. Rathna
Karnataka HCWP/6900/2020
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 as infructuous after counsel submitted that the underlying civil suit had been disposed of.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
1
¶2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
¶3
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2021
¶4
BEFORE
¶5
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR
¶6
WRIT PETITION No.6900 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)
¶7
BETWEEN :
¶8
- S. PURUSHOTHAM
¶9
- S/O LATE SHIVALINGA
¶10
- AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
¶11
- S. HEMANTH S/O LATE SHIVALINGA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
¶12
BOTH ARE R/AT NO.9, 9TH CROSS 3RD MAIN, B.M.SHREE NAGAR METAGALLI, MYSURU-570 016 …PETITIONERS
¶13
(BY SHRI. K.G.KUMARA, ADVOCATE)
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
S. PURUSHOTHAM
- petitioner
S. HEMANTH
- respondent
RATHNA
Coram
AI extract
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Karnataka HC
- Decided on
- · June
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/6900/2020
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court