Karnataka High Court
WP/13654/2022 of UMASHANKAR Vs KUMARA on 31 August 2026
CNR: KAHC010301822022 NC: 2026:KHC:47272 WP No. 13654 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A . PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13654 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: UMASHANKAR S/O RAMANNAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 44
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO. 13654 OF 2022 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
UMASHANKAR
S/O RAMANNAGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
HORAUPPARARA BEEDI,
KOTE ARAKALGUDU,
ARAKALAGUDU TLAUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 102.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GIRISH B. BALADARE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
KUMARA
S/O LATE EREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
2.
GANESHA
S/O RAJANNA @ DODDAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
3.
SWAMY
W/O LATE RAMASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3 ARE
Digitally signed
by
ANNAPURNA G
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
THE RESIDENT OF HORAUPPARARA BEEDI,
KOTE ARAKALGUDU, ARAKALGUDU, TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 102.
4.
MOHAN
S/O AJJISHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
5.
CHANNAKESHAVASHETTY @ MARKANDA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
RESPONDENT NO.4 TO 5 ARE
R/O PRAVEEN PROVISION STORE
NEAR AKSHATHA CLINIC, HASSAN ROAD
KOTE, ARAKALAGUDU,
ARAKALAGUDU TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 102.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; R5 - SERVED)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ANNEXURE-F THAT THE ORDER DTD. 24.6.2022 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.219/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC AT ARAKALGUD ON IA NO.XVII FILED UNDER
ORDER 6 RULE 17 CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION
NO.XVII FILED UNDER ORDER 6 RULE 17 BY THE PETITIONER
AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
HC-KAR
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
Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking leave of the Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to move an application to withdraw the suit and represent the suit by pointing out the formal defects.
2. The memo reads as under: "Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner respectfully submits that, due to defect in the suit kindly permit the petitioner to withdraw the suit with liberty to file fresh suit by forcing all the contentions available for the petitioner in the interest of justice and equity."
3. In view of the aforesaid memo, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought in the memo. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26