Karnataka High Court
WP/29559/2026 of SRI N SHANAKR Vs SRI V SHANAKR REDDY on 5 October 2026
CNR: KAHC010644362026 NC: 2026:KHC:55290 WP No. 29559 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 29559 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI N. SHANAKR S/O. KOTALU NARASIMHAPPA, AGED
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT PETITION NO. 29559 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI N. SHANAKR
S/O. KOTALU NARASIMHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS,
R/AT HOUSE NO.55, 2ND MAIN,
ROYAL PLACID, PHASE 1, HARALUR,
HSR EXTENSION, BANGALORE - 560 102.
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFITS NOT CLAIMED)
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SIDDHARTH B. MUCHANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI V. SHANKAR REDDY
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
2.
SRI. V. KRISHNA REDDY,
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
3.
SRI. CHANDRA REDDY,
S/O SRI V. KRISHNA REDDY,
Digitally
signed by
VINUTHA B S
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
4.
SRI. VENKATESH REDDY,
S/O SRI V. KRISHNA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
5.
SRI. MANJUNATH REDDY,
S/O SRI V. KRISHNA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
6.
SMT. SUGUNAMMA
W/O LATE V. SRINIVASAN
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DIST. 562106.
7.
SMT. GEETHAMMA,
D/O LATE V. SRINIVASAN,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
8.
SRI R.S. PRASHANTH,
S/O LATE V. SRINIVASAN,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
HC-KAR
R6 TO R8 LRS OF LATE V. SRINIVASAN.
9.
SRI V. SHIVAPPA REDDY,
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
10.
SMT. PARVATHAMMA,
D/O LATE VENKATAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
11.
SMT. YASHODAMMA,
D/O LATE VENKATAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/AT RAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106.
12.
SRI. S. VENKATESH,
S/O SRI N. SHANKAR,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 1783, 34TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN,
BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE,
BANGALORE - 560 070.
13.
SRI N.V. KRISHNAN,
S/O N.M. KONDAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 425, 12TH CROSS,
6TH MAIN, SADASHIVA NAGARA,
BANGALORE - 560 080.
…RESPONDENTS
HC-KAR
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE
HON'BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT ANEKAL TO CONCLUDE THE
TRIAL AND DISPOSE OF THE CIVIL SUIT IN O.S. NO.
1337/2014 EXPEDITIOUSLY AND WITHIN OUTER LIMIT OF 6
MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER, VIDE ANNEXURE C, AND ETC,.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
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.
ORAL ORDER
The present petition is filed seeking a direction to the Trial Court for expeditious disposal of O.S.No.1337/2014, pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal. The said suit has been instituted seeking declaratory and injunctive reliefs.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, even after a lapse of 12 years, the suit is still at the stage of service of notice on the defendants.
3. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, and on perusal of the order sheet, it is noticed that, even after a lapse of 12 years, the suit remains at the stage of
HC-KAR
service of summons. It appears that service on some of the defendants is pending for want of furnishing their correct addresses or the requisite process for issuance of summons.
4. This Court finds no justification for such delayed progress in the suit. The fact that the suit continues to remain at the stage of service of summons even after 12 years indicates that the plaintiff has not been diligent in pursuing the proceedings.
5. The Trial Court is directed to proceed with the matter expeditiously and endeavour to dispose of the suit within a period of two years from the next date of hearing.
With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
SD/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE
DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35