Karnataka High Court
WA/2969/2014 of STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs ANNAMA DEVARA DEVASTHANA on 24 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010029732014 NC: 2026:KHC:52768-DB WA No. 2969 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO. 2969 OF 2014 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. STATE
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
WRIT APPEAL NO. 2969 OF 2014 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SECRETARY TO GOVT.,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
(ENDOWMENTS AND MUZRAI),
M.S.BUILDING,
BANGALORE-560 001.
2.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
AND MUZRAI OFFICER,
RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE,
TRUSTS, BANGALORE NORTH
SUB -DIVISION,
BANGALORE-01.
3.
THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
AND MUZRAI COMMISSIONER,
RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE TRUSTS,
BANGALORE-1.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. VAHEEDA., AGA)
Digitally signed
by JUANITA
THEJESWINI
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
AND:
1.
ANNAMA DEVARA DEVASTHANA
12, SUBEDAR CHATRAM ROAD,
BANGALORE-9,
REP. BY C.D. RAJANNA MAJOR,
S/O CHIKKA DASAPPA,
R/O KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE-34.
2.
V. ANNAYYAPPA
MAJOR,
S/O VENKATARAMANNA A,
20, CHANNARAYASWAMY TEMPLE STREET,
BANGALORE-02.
3.
VENKATAPPA
MAJOR,
S/O PUTTAPPA,
R/O KODIGEHALLI,
BANGALORE SOUTH
4.
V. LAKSHMINARAYANA
MAJOR,
S/O VENKATARAMANA A,
29, MAKKALA BASAVANNA TEMPLE STREET,
NAGARTHPET,
BANGALORE-02.
5.
V. ANANTHA
MAJOR,
S/O VENKATACHALAPATHY,
29, MAKKALA BASAVANNA TEMPLE ROAD,
NAGARTHPET, BANGALORE-02
HC-KAR
6.
K.V. PRAKASH
MAJOR,
S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA,
R/O KODIGEHALLI,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK.
7.
R. RAMPRASAD
MAJOR,
S/O SHAMANNA,
R/O CHANNARAYASWAMY TEMPLE STREET,
NAGARTHPET,
BANGALORE.
8.
9.
SRI ANNAMMADEVARU DEVASTHANA
REPRESENTED BY SMT. V. RAJAMMA,
W/O LATE A.VENKATARAMA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
RESIDENT AT NO.5, P.V. NAIK LANE,
THIGALARAPET, NAGARTHPET CROSS,
BANGALORE-02.
SRI.PUTTARAJU.J
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
S/O JAYARAM.M
R/A NO.199, BEHIND PATALAMMA TEMPLE
KODIGEHALLI, SAHAKARANAGARA POST
BANGALORE-560092.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.J.KUMAR & N PAPANNA., ADVOCATES FOR R3 (A-C)
SRI. P.M.NARAYANASWAMY & HARSHAVARDHANA N., ADVOCATE FOR R6
MS. NANDINI.A., ADVOCATE FOR NAYANA TARA B.G., ADVOCATE FOR R7 & ALSO FOR R2, R5(NOC)
SRI. ESHWAR R NAIK ON IAS3/25 FOR BRINGING P’SD
FOR R9)
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED
IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.21096/2002 C/W 22972/2002
DATED 8/4/2009. CF INSUFFICIENT/SUFFICIENT APPEAL IN
TIME/OUT OF TIME FOLLOWING OFFICE OBJECTIONS HAVE
NOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH EVEN AFTER LAPSE OF THREE
WEEKS TIME
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
and
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
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 JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS)
Learned Counsel Smt.Nayanatara B.G., submits that despite orders being passed by this Court on 17.09.2025, taking note of the memos dated 25.07.2025 and 02.08.2025 filed by the learned Counsel and overruling the office objections while clearly stating that since the memos are only reporting the death of respondents No.2 and 5, it is the responsibility of the appellants to move appropriate applications, if so advised, office note is once again put up.
2. The appeals were also dismissed as abated as against the deceased respondents. Nevertheless, office
HC-KAR
has been showing the non-compliance of the office objections raised on the memos.
3. We have gone through the order dated 17.09.2025.
4. This Court by the said order has directed that it is for the appellants to file necessary applications to bring the legal representatives of deceased respondents on record. The appeals were already dismissed as abated as against the said deceased respondents, but till date no action has been taken by the appellants.
5. Consequently, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE
Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE DL CT: JL