Nagaraj S/O Dattaram Palankar v. Vinay S/O Dattaram Palankar

Karnataka HC23 Sept 2025WP/103601/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench; WP No. 103601 of 2023 (GM-CPC); Nagaraj v. Vinay & others; Article 227 of the Constitution of India; withdrawal of writ petition; infructuous; fresh suit filed before lower court; certiorari; O.S.No.120/2012; impugned order dated 16.11.2022; Annexure-A; Annexure-F; memo dated 16.11.2022; Judicial Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Dharwad; Justice Suraj Govindaraj; decision dated 23.09.2025; dismissed as infructuous; no ruling on quashing of order or restoration of suit.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ petition permitted; petition dismissed as having become infructuous. No relief on the merits of the certiorari challenge, the Annexure-F memo, or restoration of the suit. ¶39-40

Nagaraj S/O Dattaram Palankar Vs Vinay S/O… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:12928 WP No. 103601 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 103601 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

NAGARAJ S/O. DATTARAM PALANKAR, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC. PVT. SERVICE, R/O. TIRUMALA APARTMENT, NEAR RAMANGOUDA HOSPITAL, MARATHA COLONY, DHARWAD-580001, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad

¶13

VINAY S/O. DATTARAM PALANKAR, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O. KRISHNAKUNJA, HALLIKERI, CHAWAL HALIYAL ROAD, DHARWAD 580001.

¶14

TARABAI W/O. DATTARAM PALANKAR, AGE: 74 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE R/O. KRISHNAKUNJA, HALLIKERI CHAWL, HALIYAL ROAD, DHARWAD 580001.

¶15

ARUN S/O. DATTARAM PALANKAR, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O. KRISHNAKUNJA, HALLIKERI CHAWL, HALIYAL ROAD, DHARWAD 580001.

¶16

SMT. VIDYA W/O RAMESH RAIKAR (VIDYA DATTARAM PALANAKAR)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC-D:12928 WP No. 103601 of 2023

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. C/O ARYA VYSA CO-OP BANK YASHWANTPUR, BANGALORE-560001.

¶21

SMT. VEENA W/O RAJENDRA REVANKAR (VEENA D/O. DATTARAM PALANKAR) AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. KUBASAD BUILDING, NEAR DEVIKI ANEX, HALIYAL ROAD, DHARWAD-580001.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I) ISSUE A WRIT OR DIRECTION OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.11.2022 PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, DHARWAD, IN O.S.NO.120/2012 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND DISMISS THE MEMO DATED 16.11.2022 AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND RESTORE THE SUIT IN O.S.NO.120/2012 AND ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THERIN AS UNDER:

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

¶27

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶28

i. Issue a writ or direction or order in the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI to quash the impugned order dated 16.11.2022 passed by the Judicial Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Dharwad, In O.S.No.120/2012 as per ANNEXURE-A and dismiss the memo dated 16.11.2022 as per ANNEXURE-F and restore the suit in O.S.No.120/2012.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC-D:12928 WP No. 103601 of 2023

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

ii. Grant any other relief as deems fit by this Hon’ble Court in the circumstances of case in the interest of justice and equity.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo,

¶34

which reads as under:

¶35

“The advocate for the petitioner most respectfully submits as under:

¶36

It is submitted that the petitioner has filed the fresh suit before the lower Court. Hence the present petition has become infructuous. Hence, the petitioner intends to withdraw the above writ petition.

¶37

Wherefore, this Hon'ble Court may kindly and graciously be pleased to permit the petitioner to withdraw the above writ petition

¶38

Hence, this memo .”

¶39

3. The memo is placed on record. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as having become

¶40

infructuous .

¶41

Sd/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶42

VB/ct:pa/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 106

Nagaraj S/O Dattaram Palankar v. Vinay S/O Dattaram Palankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagaraj S/O Dattaram Palankar v. Vinay S/O Dattaram Palankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Usha Bhaskar Bhakta Vs the Divisional Controller

Anil Mallanagouda Patil Vs the Union of India

Nagappa S/O Bheemappa Kadakola Vs Smt Indramma W/O Prakash Katagi

Ganapati S/O Baburao Gunde Vs Rudresh S/O Irappa Byadagi

Sri. a Bhupal Reddy S/O Late Rami Reddy Vs the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)

Ningappa B Noolvi S/O Basavantappa Vs State of Karnataka