Karnataka High Court
WP/17004/2023 of SMT S MANJULA Vs SRINIVAS GOWDA on 3 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010400012023 NC: 2026:KHC:48114 W.P. No.17004/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A . PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.17004/2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. S. MANJULA D/O SRINIVAS GOWDA AGED ABOUT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO.17004/2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT. S. MANJULA
D/O SRINIVAS GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAGADISH J.R. ADV., [ABSENT]D)
AND:
1.
SRINIVAS GOWDA
S/O LATE CHIKKAAPPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
2.
SMT. BHAGYA
W/O LAKSHMINARAYANA
D/O SRINIVASAGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT M. BYAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE
BYRAKUR HOBLI, MULBAGAL TALUK.
3.
SMT. LALITHA
W/O LOKESH
D/O SRINIVASAGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
Digitally signed
by RUPA V
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
R/AT CHIKKA BEVAHALLI
MUDIYANUR POST
MULBAGAL TALUK-563131.
4.
SMT. LAKSHMI
W/O SUBRAMANI
D/O SRINIVASA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT KADAGATTUR VILLAGE
VEMGAL HOBLI
MULBAGAL TALUK-563131.
5.
T.G. SATHISH
S/O GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
…RESPONDENTS
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DTD 10.07.2023 PASSED BY THE III ADDL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, KOLAR IN OS 129/2020 VIDE
ANNEXURE-G & ETC.
THIS
PETITION,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
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
There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
2. The order sheet indicates that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner even on the earlier date of hearing.
HC-KAR
3. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE
ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22