Dismissed¶28

Sri. Kalappa M N v. Canara Bank

Karnataka HC21 Jul 2026WP/16604/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; WP No. 16604 of 2025 (GM-DRT); decision dated 21 July 2026; Justice Jyoti M; petitioner Kalappa M.N.; respondent Canara Bank; writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India; dismissed as infrunctuous at the request of petitioner's counsel with undertaking not to seek review or modification; pending interlocutory applications disposed; no issues decided, no holdings, no cases cited; order of no precedential value.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri. Kalappa M N Vs Canara Bank — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

NC: 2026:KHC:37357 WP No. 16604 of 2025

¶4

CNR: KAHC010354132025

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶6

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 16604 OF 2025 (GM-DRT)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. KALAPPA M.N., AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O. NANJAPPA M.B., R/AT MALABAR ROAD, MEENPET VIRAJPET TOWN, VIRAJPET, KODAGU, KARNATAKA-571 218.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. KARTHIK NATESH, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

CANARA BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, NO.112, JC ROAD, P.B, HALSURPETE, NAGARATHPETE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560001.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SMT. PREETHU, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶20

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

NC: 2026:KHC:37357 WP No. 16604 of 2025

¶23

CNR: KAHC010354132025

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Sri.Karthik Natesh, counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Preethu, counsel on behalf of Sri.Vignesh Shetty, for the respondent appeared in person.

¶26

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition may be dismissed as having become infructuous. When queried, counsel for the petitioner submits that a conscious decision is taken about the dismissal of the petition as having become infructuous and if an order is passed the petitioner shall not seek review of the order or modification of the order.

¶27

The oral submission is placed on record.

¶28

As the counsel on record has taken a conscious decision about the dismissal of the petition as infructuous, the Writ Petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

¶29

Because of dismissal of the Writ Petition, all pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of.

¶30

SD/(JYOTI M) JUDGE

¶31

SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26

Sri. Kalappa M N v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri. Kalappa M N v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Muni Vijaykumar Vs M/S Hiranandani Financial Services Private Limited

M/S Mandev Educational Trust Vs the Labour Officer

Mr Basavaraj Naik Vs Bajaj Finance Ltd.

Mr Girish Kumar K T Vs the Authorised Officer

Sri Srinivasa Reddy Vs Assistant General Manager

Smt.Bindhu Shivakumar Vs the Authorised Officer