Disposed¶32

Fortis Hospitals Ltd. v. Mrs Shanti Devi

Karnataka HC11 Feb 2026WP/618/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Fortis Hospitals Ltd. v. Mrs. Shanti Devi & Mr. Vimal Chordia; WP No. 618 of 2022 (GM-CPC); High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; decided 11 February 2026 by Tara Vitasta Ganju, J.; writ under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 against order dated 01.12.2021 in O.S.No.2788/2010 (X Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, CCH-43); disposed of as withdrawn on 'in principle' settlement between parties; liberty to revive petition if final settlement fails; all pending applications closed.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to revive it in the event the final settlement does not fructify; all pending applications stand closed. ¶32

Fortis Hospitals Ltd. Vs Mrs Shanti Devi — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:8414 WP No. 618 of 2022

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 618 OF 2022 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

FORTIS HOSPITALS LTD., COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT FORTIS INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, SECTOR 44, GURGAON-122 003. HAVING ITS BRANCH HOSPITAL AT SHARIEFF CHAMBERS, NO.14, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052, REPRESENTED BY MR.ANAND ANGADI.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. ANKIT.A.MISHRA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. R.RAVI SHANKAR., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

MRS. SHANTI DEVI AGED MAJOR, W/O S.PUKHRAJ, M-1 SHARIEFF CHAMBERS, NO.14, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052.

¶12

MR. VIMAL CHORDIA AGED MAJOR, S/O S.PUKHRAJ, M-1 SHARIEFF CHAMBERS, NO.14, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SRI. RAJADITHYA SADASIVAN., ADVOCATE)

¶15

-1-

¶16

NC: 2026:KHC:8414 WP No. 618 of 2022

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD.01.12.2021 PASSED IN O.S.NO.2788/2010 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (CCH-43) ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE-A.

¶19

THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY SSSHEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

Learned counsel for the parties once again submit that

¶23

they are still in the process of finalising the details to settle the matter. They have also filed a Joint Memo stating that the steps for settlement have progressed, however, more time is required.

¶24

Given that the parties have settled the matter ‘in principle’, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending since the terms of settlement are not qua this petition.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions,

¶26

submits that he may be permitted to withdraw this petition.

¶27

-2-

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:8414 WP No. 618 of 2022

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

He further submits that since there is ‘in principle’ settlement between the parties, in the event the terms of settlement do not fructify, he may be permitted to revive this petition.

¶31