Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/525/2026 of SRI SUBODH B T Vs M/S. VASUVANA PROPERTIES on 20 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010227842026 NC: 2026:KHC:37186 CRL.RP No. 525 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.525 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SRI SUBODH B T AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010227842026
NC: 2026:KHC:37186
CRL.RP No. 525 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.525 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SRI SUBODH B T
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
”ASHIRWAD”
NO.814, 100 FT RING ROAD
HOSAKEREHALLI
BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE
BENGALURU-560 085
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. UDHAYA KUMAR G, ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
AND:
M/S. VASUVANA PROPERTIES
NEW NO.9/2, ANANI STREET
CHINMAYA NAGAR
CHENNAI-600092
REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER
SRI. HARIKRISHNAN K.E
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA K, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 438 R/W 442 OF BNSS
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER AND JUDGMENT PASSED
BY
THE
HONBLE
XXV
ADDL.
CMM,
BENGALURU
IN
C.C.NO.23961/2021 02.11.2023 AND ETC.
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010227842026
NC: 2026:KHC:37186
CRL.RP No. 525 of 2026
THIS
PETITION,
COMING
ON
FOR
REPORTING
SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
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 counsel for the petitioner though undertaken to pay the balance amount, today he is not present. On 30.06.2026, the counsel for the petitioner undertaken to pay the balance amount within 15 days. But on 15.07.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and inspite of opportunity is given, the petitioner has not paid the balance amount as agreed. Hence, the counsel for the petitioner is not pursuing the matter diligently. This revision petition is not yet admitted. Hence, the question of consideration of this revision petition does not arise in view of non-pursuing the matter and this revision petition is also against the concurrent finding. Under the said circumstances, I do not find any ground to adjourn the matter. Hence, the revision petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN