IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A.PATIL REVIEW PETITION NO.382 OF 2018 C/W REVIEW PETITION NO.381 OF 2018 IN W.P.NO.26160 OF 2013 RP NO.382 OF 2018:
BETWEEN SUMARANI B., W/O SUPRI A AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS THEN: PSI BMTF B.B.M.P. MAIN BUILDING N.R. SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002 NOW:PSI., DPO TECHNICAL CELL & CYBER CRIME AND POLICE IT WING MANDYA PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BENGALURU. …PETITIONER (BY SRI NAVKESH BATRA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI PAVAN KUMAR B. S/O BALAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS M/S. NANDI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR ENTERPRISE LTD PROJECT OFFICE, VARAHASANDRA BENGALURU 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001.
3. BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE RETPD. BY SRI R P SHARMA, ADGP BBMP MAIN BUILDING, NR SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002.
4. SRI R P SHARMA, ADGP BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE BBMP MAIN BUILDING, NR SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002.
5. SRI PRAMOD RAO DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE BBMP MAIN BUILDING, N R SQUARE BENGALURU-560002.
6. M K KEMPEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS S/O M J KRISHNAPPA No.1, CHOWDESHWARI TWO WHEELER CLINIC GAVIPURAM GUTTAHALLI BENGALURU-560 019. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SATISH V, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SMT.ROOPA.K.R, HCGP FOR R2, RESPONDENTS No.3, 4, 5 AND 6 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) RP No.382/2018 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC PRAYING TO RVIEW THE IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26.9.2018 IN WP No.26162 of 2013 AND RESTORE THE SAID WRIT PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND TO DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION AND ANY OTHER ORDER THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE.
RP NO.381 OF 2018:
BETWEEN SUMARANI B., W/O SUPRI A AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS THEN: PSI BMTF B.B.M.P. MAIN BUILDING N.R. SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002 NOW:PSI., DPO TECHNICAL CELL & CYBER CRIME AND POLICE IT WING MANDYA PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BENGALURU. …PETITIONER (BY SRI NAVKESH BATRA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI SRINATH MANGALORE S/O NARASIMHA MANGALORE AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS M/S NANDI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR ENTERPRISE LTD. No.1, MIDFORD HOUSE MIDFORD GARDENS BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001.
3. BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE RETPD. BY SRI R P SHARMA, ADGP BBMP MAIN BUILDING, NR SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002.
4. SRI R P SHARMA, ADGP BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE BBMP MAIN BUILDING, NR SQUARE BANGALORE-560 002.
5. SRI PRAMOD RAO DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE BBMP MAIN BUILDING, N R SQUARE BENGALURU-560002.
6. M K KEMPEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS S/O M J KRISHNAPPA No.1, CHOWDESHWARI TWO WHEELER CLINIC GAVIPURAM GUTTAHALLI BANGALORE-560 019. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SATISH V, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SMT.ROOPA.K.R, HCGP FOR R2, SRI S P NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS REVIEW PETITON IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC PRAYING TO RVIEW THE IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26.9.2018 IN WP No.26160 of 2013 AND RESTORE THE SAID WRIT PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND TO DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION AND ANY OTHER ORDER THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE.
THESE REVIEW PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R These two review petitions are filed by the petitioners praying this Court to review the order dated 26.09.2018, passed in Writ petition No.26160 of 2013 (GM-RES) connected with Crl.P. No.2459/2013, W.P.No.26162/2013 (GM-RES).
2. The learned counsel for respondent No.1, while filing a memo brought to the notice of this Court that against the order passed by this Court, the State has preferred Special Leave Petition ( S L P) (Criminal) Dairy No. 656/2019) and the Hon’ble Apex Court, by order dated 25.03.2019 has granted stay of operation of the impugned judgment with regard to direction to the petitioner (Government of Karnataka) to pay the compensation and in that light, the present review petitions do not survive for consideration. The said submission has been placed on record along with the copy of the Hon’ble Apex Court’s order.
In view of the same, the review petitions are disposed of with a liberty to revive the same after the disposal of the SLP before the Hon’ble Apex Court.
In view of the disposal of review petitions, I.A.No.1/2018 and I.A. No.2/2018 do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE HR