The High Court of Karnataka dismissed Writ Petition No.9814 of 2017 filed for quashing an impugned order due to non-prosecution. The petitioners' counsel failed to appear on the hearing date without providing reasons after prior notices were issued.
Writ Petition dismissed for non-prosecution due to non-appearance of counsel without reasonable explanation.
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.9814 OF 2017 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
The Petitioner No.1 and 2 are Residing at No.2820, 12th Main Road, D Block, 2nd Stage, Rajajinagar, Bangalore-10.
WP.No.9814/2017
2
( By Smt. Vanitha Devi V., Advocate )
AND:
All are residing at No.2820, 12th Cross, 1st Main, Rajajinagar, 2nd Stage, Bangalore-10. .. Respondents
(By Sri H.S.Santhosh, Advocate for R-1 & R-2 And Sri V.Ananda, Advocate for R-3 )
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ quashing the order dated 21.1.2017 on in Ex.P.No.2036/2017 on the file of the City Civil Judge at Bengaluru City, a copy of which is produced at annexure-D in the ends of justice and to grant such other order or direction as deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in `B’ Group through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:
WP.No.9814/2017
3
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners is neither present physically nor through Video Conference. No reasons are forthcoming for non-appearance of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
observations :
“ None appear for the petitioners either physically or through video conference.
Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 alone physically present in the Court.
As finally, ten days time is granted for appearance of learned counsel for the petitioners and to further proceed further in the matter.
It is made clear that in case, if the learned counsel for the petitioners does not appear on the next date of hearing, the Court may proceed to pass appropriate order including dismissal of the petition.
List this matter on 24.03.2022.”
WP.No.9814/2017 4
In spite of the above, learned counsel for the petitioners has neither shown any reason for her
non-appearance nor appeared in this petition, which is of the year 2017.
Hence, the Writ Petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
bk/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be proceeded with despite non-appearance of counsel for the petitioners.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri R.Parthasarthi
Sri Srinivasa
Sri G.Krishna
Sri Manohar Lal
Sri Avinash
Smt. Susheela
H.B. Prabhakara Swamy
S.B. Shivarudrappa
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
