The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226/227 because the petitioner failed to ensure service of emergent notices to unserved respondents despite being granted sufficient time.
Writ Petition dismissed for non-service and 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
WRIT PETITION No.13848 OF 2018 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
M/s. Bangalore Land & Homes Ltd., Formerly known as the Synergy Mortgage Loan Company Ltd., Having their office at No.33-44, 1 & 2, 8th Main, 4th Cross, Sadashivnagar, R.M.V.Extension, Bengaluru-560 050. Represented by its Manager, Sri K.S.Subbaraju.
.. Petitioner
( By Sri Dinesh S. Kadlas, Advocate )
AND:
Both Respondent No.1 and 2 are Residing at No.35/1949, Marappa Garden, Nagarbhavi, Bengaluru-560 072.
2
WP.No.13848/2018
3. Sri B.Chandrashekar,
S/o B.Boraiah, Aged about 51 years, Residing at No.523,th Main Road, SVG Nagar, Moodalapalya, Bengaluru-560 072. .. Respondents
( Petition as against R-1 and R-2 dismissed Vide order dated 24.03.2022; Service held sufficient in respect of Respondent No.3 vide order dated 14.12.2021)
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue an order or writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 14.03.2018, passed on I.A.No.7 in Execution Case No.1328/2011, on the file of the 19th Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, CCH-18, marked as Annexure-H and consequently allow I.A.No.7 filed by the petitioner in Execution Case No.1328/2011, on the file of the 19th Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, CCH-18, marked as Annexure-F and grant such other order or relief’s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
None appear in this matter either physically or through
Video Conference.
In spite of granting sufficient time, the petitioner has
not taken fresh steps to ensure the service of emergent
WP.No.13848/2018
3
notice to unserved respondent Nos.1 and 2. The writ petition is of the year 2018 and still at the stage of service of emergent notice upon the unserved respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Hence, the writ petition as against respondent Nos.1 and 2 stands dismissed. Writ Petition also stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
bk/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for failure to ensure service of emergent notice to unserved respondents.
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. Bangalore Land & Homes Ltd.
Sri K.L.M. Pai
Ms. Soumya
Sri B.Chandrashekar
H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
