The High Court of Karnataka Bench at Dharwad dismissed a writ petition filed in 2015 for non-prosecution on the ground that the petitioners had neither appeared personally nor through video conferencing over a nine-year period.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:12175 WP No. 110527 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
WRIT PETITION NO. 110527 OF 2015 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
BENGALURU-560 098.
Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA KATTIMANI AND SRI. GURUBASAVARAJ.S.M., ADVOCATES [ABSENT])
NC: 2024:KHC-D:12175 WP No. 110527 of 2015
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. KIRTILATA.R.PATIL., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. G.I.GACHHINAMATH., ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. PRAKASHGOUDA.N.HATTI., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Though matter called twice, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners, either personally or through video conferencing. When the matter is listed before the Court, and is
called out, the advocate must be present in the Court. His or her absence may effect the case.
Smt.Kirtilata R.Patil., learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and Sri.G.I.Gachhinamath., learned counsel for respondent No.2 have appeared in person.
As could be seen from the petition papers, the petition is filed in the year 2015. Now we are in the month of August 2024. The petition is pending for almost nine years. As already noted above, though matter called twice, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners, either personally or through video conferencing. It appears that the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE
TKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 44
SMT. GANGABHAI W/O LATE SHANMUKRAO DESAI
SMT.GIRIJA W/O PRABHAKAR PATIL
SMT. MAHADEVI W/O BASAVARAJ DESAI
SMT.KAMALA W/O SHIVALINGAPPA PATIL
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT. OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES
THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD
JYOTI MULIMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
