IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.21065 OF 2014 (GM - CPC) BETWEEN VISHWANATHA SALIAN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O SHEENA PUTRAN, R/O NEAR PERSONAL COMPLEX, OLD ROAD, YENAGUDDE VILLAGE, POST KATAPADI, UDUPI TALUK – 574 105 …PETITIONER (By SRI.B.S.PRASAD, ADVOCATE) AND 1. JALAJA SALIAN, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, W/O SHANKAR KOTIAN, R/O 7TH CROSS ROAD, INDIRA NAGAR, KUKKIKATTE, NO.76, BADAGABETTU VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK – 576 107.
2. SANJEEVA SALIAN, S/O SHEENA PUTRAN, AGE 62 YEARS, R/O NEAR PERSONAL COMPLEX, OLD ROAD, YENAGUDDE VILLAGE, POST KATAPADI – 576 105, UDUPI TALUK.
3. NARAYANA SALIAN, S/O SHEENA PUTRAN, AGE 44 YEARS, R/O NEAR PERSONAL COMPLEX, OLD ROAD, YENAGUDDE VILLAGE, POST KATAPADI – 576 105, UDUPI TALUK.
4. BABY SALIAN, W/O SHEKAR SUVARNA, AGED 48 YEARS, R/O SRI DEVI NILAYA, HANUMANA NAGARA, POST MALPE – 576 108, UDUPI TALUK.
5. CHANDRAVATHI SUVARNA, W/O LATE MANJUNATH SALIAN, AGE 55 YEARS, 6. PRASHANTH, S/O MANJUNATH SALIAN, AGE 35 YEARS, 7. HEMALATHA, D/O MANJUNATH SALIAN, AGE 32 YEARS, 8. DAKSHAYINI, D/O MANJUNATH SALIAN, AGE 30 YEARS, 9. MOHINI, D/O MANJUNATH SALIAN, AGE 28 YEARS, SL.NO.5 TO 9 ARE RESIDENTS OF MANJUNATHA KRIPA, OPP. SHIVAPANCHAKSHARI BHAJANA MANDIRA, BEACH ROAD, MALPE POST – 576 108, UDUPI TALUK.
10. PRAKASH SALIAN, S/O DAYANANDA SALIAN, AGE 45 YEARS, 11. GOUTHAM, S/O DAYANANDA SALIAN, AGE 35 YEARS, 12. MALLIKA, S/O DAYANANDA SALIAN, AGE 30 YEARS, SL.NO.10 TO 12 ARE RESIDENTS OF C/O JALAJA SALIAN, 7TH CROSS ROAD, INDIRA NAGAR, KUKKIKATTE, NO.76, BADAGABETTU VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK – 576 107. ... RESPONDENTS (R1, R3 TO R9, AND R11 ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) ******* THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22/26.11.2013 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT UDUPI IN O.S.NO.105/2013 VIDE ANNEXURE – D AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING :-
ORDER This writ petition has come up before the Court for not taking steps to serve notice to respondents 2, 10 and 12. When this matter was called on 4.2.2019, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, Registry was directed to ascertain telephonically what is the stage of the original suit i.e. O.S.No.105/2013 on the file of the Civil Judge, Udupi. It is informed that the said suit was compromised and on the basis of that, the suit was disposed of on 18.3.2017. In that view of the matter, this writ petition impugning the interlocutory order in the said proceeding does not survive for consideration.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE rs