IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.126 OF 2014 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
Sri.Chikkaiah, S/o Late Chikkegowda, Aged about 61 years, Hebberalu Village, Athagur Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District. … PETITIONER (By Sri H.C.Shivaramu, Advocate) AND:
1. Savithramma, D/o. Channegowda, Aged about 55 years, Maraliga Village, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District-571 428.
2. Smt.Ningamma, W/o Madaiah @ Kundegowda, Aged about 68 years, R/o Kurubaradoddi Village, Athagur Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District-571 428.
3. Smt.Chikkamotamma, Aged about 62 years, R/o Hebberalu Village, Athagur Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District-571 428.
4. Smt.Ningamma, W/o. Channegowda, Age: 71 years, Maraliga Village, Koppa Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District-571 428.
5. Smt.Chikkathayamma, W/o Ningaiah, Aged about 62 years, R/o Hebberalu Village, Athagur Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District-571 428.
6. Smt.Jayamma, W/o. Chikkonu, Aged about 52 years, R/o Thorechakanahalli Village, C.A.Kere Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District-571 428. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.T.N.Raghupathi, Advocate for R1; SMT.Veenashetty, Advocate for R5 & R6; R2, R3 & R4 are served but unrepresented) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 6.8.2013 passed on I.A.No.1 in R.A.No.30/2013 pending on the file of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Maddur vide Annexure-H.
This Writ Petition coming on for Further Arguments this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER This writ petition is filed impugning the order dated 6.8.2013 passed on I.A.No.1 in R.A.No.30/2013 pending on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Maddur.
2. When this matter has come up for consideration today, learned counsel for respondents would submit that the original proceedings in Regular Appeal itself is disposed of. Therefore, the question of continuing this writ petition, which is filed on an interim order passed in the said appeal, does not survive for consideration.
3. Based on his submission, the Court Officer was directed to ascertain the factual position through the ecourts website.
4. On going through the same, it is seen that R.A.No.30/2013 is disposed of on 26.7.2018. Hence, this writ petition does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE cp*