The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution due to a lack of representation and failure to comply with previous directions to the respondents.
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 AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO.7534/2017 (LB - BMP)
BETWEEN:
MRS. MARY THANNICKAL, W/O MR.MARY THANICKAL, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/A NAVA JEEVA ASHRAM, 50/12 OUTER RING ROAD, BANGALORE-560043.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DILRAJ ROHIT SEQUEIRA, ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
AND:
2
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NITHYANANDA K.R., HCGP FOR R1)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENTS FROM BLOCKING THE ONLY ACCESS AVAILABLE TO THE PETITIONER TO ACCESS TO THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This Court by an order dated 06.06.2017 directed
that in the event the office objections would not be complied, the petition would be dismissed for its nonprosecution. Since then, there is no representation for
3
the petitioner and the office objections are yet to be complied.
Therefore, the petition is dismissed for its nonprosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
VBS
Mrs. Mary Thannickal
The State of Karnataka
The Commissioner, BBMP
Mr. Sushil Manthri
M. Nagaprasanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
