Sri. Krishnappa vs Sri. Muniyappa

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Orders Decided May 30, 2024

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1891710

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1891710
Court: Karnataka Orders High Court
Judge: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Decided On: May 30, 2024
Case Number: WP/3717/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sri. Krishnappa

Respondent

Sri. Muniyappa

Excerpt

-1-in the high court of karnataka at bengalurudated this the 30th day of may, 2024 before the hon'ble mr justice h.t. narendra prasad writ petition no. 3717 of 2022 (lb-res) between: sri. krishnappa s/o. munishami bovi aged about 58 years kolar district. …petitioner (by sri.srinivas g., advocate [absebt]) and:1. sri. muniyappas/o. venkataramanappa aged about 61 years digitally signed by kolar district. hemalatha a location: high court of 2. the executive officer karnataka malur taluk, malur.3. the panchayath development officer4. the secretary …respondents -2- this writ petition is filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india praying to quash the impugned order vide annexure-a dated:03.10.2018 passed by the r-2.grant an interim orderto stay the impugned order vide annx- a dtd. 03.10.2018 passed by the r-2. this petition, coming on for orders, this day, the court made the following:order1. this court by order dated 04.09.2023 has passed the following order:“1. sri. srinivas g., learned counsel submits that he would be entering appearance for the petitioner. registry is directed to print his name as such in the cause list.2. he seeks for and is granted a week's time tocomply with the office objections. if the office objections are not complied with by 13.09.2023, the petition would be liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.3. re-list this matter on 15.09.2023 under the caption 'dismissal for non-compliance'.”2. inspite of granting sufficient time, the petitioner has failed to comply with the office objections. -3-3. today, when the matter was called out, noneappeared for the petitioner. office objections are not complied with. it appears that the petitioner is not diligent in prosecuting the case. hence, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. sd/- judge dm list no.: 1 sl no.: 29

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3717 OF 2022 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. KRISHNAPPA S/O. MUNISHAMI BOVI AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS KOLAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.SRINIVAS G., ADVOCATE [ABSEBT]) AND:
1. SRI. MUNIYAPPA
S/O. VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS Digitally signed by KOLAR DISTRICT. HEMALATHA A Location: High Court of 2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER Karnataka MALUR TALUK, MALUR.
3. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
4. THE SECRETARY …RESPONDENTS -2- THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ANNEXURE-A DATED:

03.10.2018 PASSED BY THE R-2.GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER

TO STAY THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ANNX- A DTD. 03.10.2018 PASSED BY THE R-2. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

1. This Court by order dated 04.09.2023 has passed the following order:

“1. Sri. Srinivas G., learned counsel submits that he would be entering appearance for the petitioner. Registry is directed to print his name as such in the cause list.

2. He seeks for and is granted a week's time to

comply with the office objections. If the office objections are not complied with by 13.09.2023, the petition would be liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.

3. Re-list this matter on 15.09.2023 under the caption 'Dismissal for Non-Compliance'.”

2. Inspite of granting sufficient time, the petitioner has failed to comply with the office objections. -3-

3. Today, when the matter was called out, none

appeared for the petitioner. Office objections are not complied with. It appears that the petitioner is not diligent in prosecuting the case. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- JUDGE DM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Same Court & Year Karnataka Orders · 2024 Same Parties Sri. Krishnappa vs Sri. Muniyappa Same Judge H.T. Narendra Prasad