Karnataka High Court
WP/112443/2019 of SHRI.PRASHANT S/O LAXMAN MANNODDAR Vs THE CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER on 27 April 2026
No. 112443 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 112443 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI.PRASHANT S/O LAXMAN MANNODDAR AGE.23 YEARS OCC. STUDENT RESIDINT AT ANANT, PLOT NO.2,
WP No. 112443 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO. 112443 OF 2019 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SHRI.PRASHANT S/O LAXMAN MANNODDAR
AGE.23 YEARS OCC. STUDENT
RESIDINT AT ANANT, PLOT NO.2,
ASHWI PARK, SHIRADI NAGAR
POST UAD, DAHRWAD-580 005
&PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ BALLOLI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER
UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
REGIONAL OFFICE, HUBBALLI
OFFICE NO.1 AND 2, I FLOOR
ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR
HUBBALLI-580 023, DIST. DHARWAD
&RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS
OF THE AMOUNTS DUE AND PAYABLE BY IT TO THE DECEASED
FATHER OF THE PETITIONER AS CALLED UPON IN THE LEGAL
NOTICE VIDE ANNEXURE-E.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING.
WP No. 112443 of 2019
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This writ petition is filed on 05.08.2019. The matter was posted on 11.12.2019 and four weeks time was granted for compliance of office objections. On 09.03.2020 two weeks time was granted subject to condition that if the office objections are not complied with such period, the petition shall be listed for dismissal for default. Today when the matter is called, none appears for the petitioner. The writ petition is of the year 2019. In spite of granting sufficient time, the office objections are not complied with. The petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. In view of the peremptory order, the writ petition is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- JUDGE
MBS