K.M.Rajagopal v. the Commissioner
Case brief
What is this about?
Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; Justice M.I. Arun; WP No. 6496 of 2020 (GM-CPC); decided 2 April 2025; NC: 2025:KHC:13900. Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by petitioners K.M. Rajagopal and Smt. Renuka against the Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority, seeking quashing of the order dated 29.05.2019 of the LXXIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall Unit, Bengaluru, in O.S.No.25056/2015 passed on their interim application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. Dismissed for non-prosecution: counsel Sri Satish T S filed a memo for retirement, none appeared, and the Court recorded that the petitioners were not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. No issues framed, no cases cited, no costs or amounts awarded. Useful only as a procedural dismissal; carries no ratio on the merits of the challenge to the trial-court order.
What did the court decide?
The petitioners appeared to be not interested in prosecuting the writ petition; their counsel had filed a memo for retirement and none appeared for the petitioners.