IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO.8273/2017 & WRIT PETITION NO.8608/2017 (GM - CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI B.V. OMPRAKASH S/O. LATE B.V. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.324, BELLARY MAIN ROAD, GANGANAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 032. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI C.M. DESAI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SMT. MUNIYAMMA, W/O. CHINNAIAH, D/O. CHIKKAMUTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NELAKHADRENAHALLI VILLAGE, POSHETHALLI POST, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 561 211.
2. SRI CHIKKAMUTTARAYAPPA S/O. LATE MUTTARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, 3. SRI LINGEGOWDA S/O. CHIKKAMUTTARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, 4. SRI NAGARAJU S/O. CHIKKAMUTTARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 5. SRI D.L. NARASHIMAMURTHY S/O. LATE LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, SL. NO.2 TO 5 ARE R/AT: DEVARAKONDAHALLI, HALEHALLI MAJARA, MANCHENAHALLI HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT – 561 208.
6. SRI VASUDEVAPPA @ VASUDEVA S/O. V. NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT D.NO.16-B, 1ST MAIN VIDYANAGAR, OPP: BANASHANKARAMMA TEMPLE, BANGALORE – 560 040.
7. SRI VAYALAMANNIL BAJI JOSEPH S/O. JOSEPH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT H.NO.494, H.M.T. LAYOUT, R.T. NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 032. ... RESPONDENTS (BY R-1 TO R-5 AND R-7 – SERVED UNREPRESENTED) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 09.11.2016 ON I.A.NO.3 UNDER ANNEXURE-C AND THE ORDER DATED 03.02.2017 ON I.A.NO.6, UNDER ANNEXURE-F, PASSED O.S.NO.102/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, GAURIBIDANUR, CHICCKABALLAPUR TALUK AND DISTRICT.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R These writ petitions are filed against the order dated 09/11/2016 on I.A.No.3 and order dated 03/02/2017 on I.A.No.6 in O.S.No.102/2013 on the file of Additional Civil Judge at Gauribidanur, Chikkaballapur Taluk & District ['Trial Court' for short].
2. It is discerned that the said O.S.No.102/2013 has been disposed of by the Trial Court and hence, the writ petitions do not survive for consideration.
In view of the aforesaid, writ petitions stand dismissed as having rendered infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE S*