High Court of Karnataka dismissed a writ petition filed by a petitioner in absentia. Corresponding counsel sought adjournments, which were refused twice. Despite a final listing, the petitioner failed to appear, leading the court to dismiss the petition.
Petition dismissed due to non-appearance 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, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G.UMA
WRIT PETITION NO.100371/2018(GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI S. GOPALA REDDY S/O S. VENKATA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: CHANALU VILLAGE, TALUK AND DIST: BALLARI – 583 116.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI MANJUNATHA G. PATIL AND SRI JAGADISHGOUD PATIL, ADVOCATES)
AND:
CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2024.04.10 15:20:57 +0530
…RESPONDENTS
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE CANCELLATION OF IR-REVOCABLE REGISTERED GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 05.12.2017 WHICH IS DULY REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO.SRG-4-00113-2017-18 IN BOOK-4, STORED IN CD NO.SRGD167 REGISTERED IN THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-E. DECLARE ILLEGAL, WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF LAW, NULL AND VOID IF ANY CHARGES OR TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN TAKEN PLACE OR CREATED BY THE RESPONDENTS AS AGAINST THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WHICH IS MENTIONED IN THE IRREVOCABLE REGISTERED GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 02.07.2010 VIDE REGISTERED DOCUMENT NO.SRG-4-00113-2010-11 CD NO. SRGD45 REGISTERED IN THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TOWARDS THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.334A TO AN EXTENT OF 17 ACRES 81 GUNTAS AND THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.333 A/G TO AN EXTENT OF 2 ACRES 19 GUNTAS IN TOTAL 20-00 ACRES, WHICH IS SITUATED AT D. HAGALURU HOSAHALLI VILLAGE OF SIRUGUPPA TALUK, BELLARY DISTRICT. DIRECT THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO RESTORE THE REGISTERED IRREVOCABLE GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 02.07.2010 AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. No
representation, even when the matter is passed over twice.
The order sheet dated 02.04.2024 reads as under;
“At the first instance when the matter was called at morning session, learned counsel for the petitioner was absent. There was no representation.
When the matter was passed over twice and again called at 4.05 p.m., proxy counsel appears and submits that, learned counsel for the petitioner is waiting to connect through V.C., and the proxy counsel prays for time.
The order sheet dated 21.03.2024 reads as under:
“Learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. No representation.
Learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 submitted that the prayer made in petition to quash the cancellation of irrevocable registered general power of attorney deed, by declaring as illegal, without authority of law, null and void and also to direct respondent No.1 to restore the registered irrevocable general power of attorney. These reliefs could be granted only by the Civil Court not by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.
To hear learned counsel for the petitioner on maintainability of the petition, finally list this matter on 02.04.2024.”
Therefore I do not find any reason to adjourn the matter. However, to afford one more opportunity, list this matter on 03.04.2024.”
In-spite of that, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It appears, the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. Therefore the petition is dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
EM/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition regarding cancellation of a power of attorney is maintainable in a writ court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SRI S. GOPALA REDDY
THE SUB REGISTRAR SIRIGUPPA
SRI POMPAREDDY
SRI A. RAMALINIGA REDDY
SRI A. BASAVA REDDY
SRI A. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
M.G. UMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
