Writ petition challenging a DRT interlocutory order refusing impleadment of the petitioner as defendant no.3 in O.A. No.835/2010 was dismissed as infructuous on the petitioner's own memo, since the main O.A. had already been disposed of by the DRT on 29.01.2016. No substantive proposition of law was decided.
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 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 13194 OF 2015 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
SRI. M. RAMESH, S/O LATE L.C. MUNISWAMY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS, R/A NO.21, FLAT NO.B1, BRUNTON ROAD, BRUNTON ROAD RUSTUMJI APTS, BANGALORE 560 025
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SUMANTHA S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P.B. APPAIAH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
NC: 2024:KHC:45625 WP No. 13194 of 2015
MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE 560 003
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.S. RADHANANDAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.02.2015 PASSED BY THE DRT BANGALORE IN I.A.NO.478/2015 IN O.A.NO.835/2010 VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND THEREBY CONSIDER THE I.A. FILED BY THE PROPOSED DEFENDANT NO.3 IN DRT BENGALURU AND THE PETITIONER HEREIN AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
ORAL ORDER
"In the light of the above mentioned premises, the petitioner most humbly and respectfully prays that this Hon'ble High Court may be pleased:
1. To issue a Writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and set aside the impugned order dated 06.02.2015 passed by the DRT Bangalore in IA No.478/2015 in O.A.NO.835/2010 produced vide Annexure-H and thereby consider the IA filed by the proposed
Defendant No.3 in DRT Bengaluru and the petitioner herein.
2. Grant such other and further reliefs deems fit and proper under the circumstances."
by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which reads
as under:
The petitioner above named submits as follows:
2. The Petitioner has found out that the main case O.A. No. 835/2010. has been disposed of by the DRT vide its final order dated 29.01.2016. Hence, nothing further survives for consideration in the above petition and this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the above writ petition as having become infructuous.
3. The Petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may also be pleased to reiterate the direction to Respondent No.1 to take note of and consider the proposal of the Petitioner in respect of settlement of the pro-rata dues of the Petitioner if the same has been considered in respect of the other flat owners as observed by this Hon'ble Court in the interim order dated 11-03-2016 passed in the above case."
NC: 2024:KHC:45625 WP No. 13194 of 2015
dismissed as infructuous .
SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri. M. Ramesh
M/s HDFC Ltd.
Ganti Phani
Suraj Govindaraj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
