Bench observed that petitioners were absent despite multiple calls and dismissed the writ petition for default.
The petition is rejected for default due to the absence of the petitioner.
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 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO.8446/2019 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN :
SMT. JYOTHI H R W/O. SRI. RAJA, D/O. LATE. RATHNA CHARI, R/AT NO. 222/24, 5TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, AGRAHARA LAYOUT, YALAHANKA, BENGALURU – 560 064.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHANNAVEERAYYA S. K., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
AND :
SMT. JAYALAKSHMI W/O. SRI. DEVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT: NO. 296, KHANESHUMARI, 24/296, 1ST CROSS, 5TH MAIN ROAD, AGRAHARA LAYOUT, YALAHANKA, BENGALURU – 560 064.
... RESPONDENT
(NOTICE SERVED ON RESPONDENT)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.12.2018 ON IA NOs.1 AND 2/2018
2
IN O.S.NO.1515/2015 PASSED BY XXII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU (CCH-07) AT ANNEXURE-A.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R
It is seen that this petition was called twice on 19.11.2021, but none appeared. None appears even today despite the observation that the petition could be dismissed for default if there is absence. It is obvious that the concerned is not interested in prosecuting the petition.
Therefore, the petition stands rejected.
SD/- JUDGE
AN/-
Smt. Jyothi H R
Smt. Jayalakshmi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
