Sri Naganna B Awatte vs The Managing Director on 11 March, 2009

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Naganna B Awatte vs The Managing Director on 11 March, 2009

Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy

J-

11: um men coum' or 

cmcmr BENCH AT    . '

DATED THIS "ma 11m DAY on   

BEFORE  '_ 

THE HoN=BLE MR.JUsT1c§;«R';A.1y§   

WRIT PETrr1o1§j'i»zo. 30623,;   
AND W.P. 80625--26~«,.' 2{)(}_9 (GPs{fKsII1)C)

BETH:

1.

Naganna B. Awatfé   '   

S/0   
Aged abi:x1r3,50 yeaﬁf, .. "  
Yadgir"i'£L31.1k;w% " _ "  . .
   

. _ Naeiappa 
V' _; Sic Late:  Awatte
 _  about 

22/a Gurmitkal

   
\ «  District.

 S/0 Late Basanna Awattc
"Agéxi about 45 years,

% *  R]a Gurmitkal
  Yadgr Taiuk,
Gulbarga District.

. . . . Petitioner?»

(By Sri. Harsha D. Joshi, Advocate)

F/Hi



 

.2.

A31):

The Managng Director  "   0
Karnataka State Industrial Investment. ..  , _: '  .
And Development Corporat;ion.<Ltd.--,é  
Khanji Bhavan,   1 '

IV Floor, East Wing 
49, Race Course Road,
Bangalore-560 001. _     

_   Respozfxdent
(By Sri. Ashok Kifiag, .'Adjsz0ca_tt:)' " « _

TH;&E.5J:'~;~   - P1§',*m':0N$..AA0ee.FI£.E;j "l}NDER ARTICLES
226 AND;  OF THE "~CONS_'_1{IfTUTION 013' INDIA
PRAYING. '$0  THE: ORDER DATED 02.08.2004
ISSUED 05:00,. No.  B.'fGM-- -.e(z;,v}/ SBD/Ho/9w 2004-05
PASSED 'BY'TH_E_RESPONDEN"I' AS IN ANNEXURE~'B'.

 THE5 E' 'T.-fFefmfimscomrne on FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARHSIG TH'IS_ '0.AY,'*1f§Ia:. eoum MADE THE FOLLOWING:

~    «ngzuxxsei for the respondent---KSSII)C is

' submission that this writ petition is an " 'peeeess of court. The first petitioner ﬁled WP. calling in qtzestion the auction sale * ﬁetjticauon pubiished on 03.05.2006 in Samyukta Kamataka, Bangalore, which was dismissed as M ...3..

withdrawn on 19.06.2006. There afterwards .1 petitioner ﬁled wnp. No. 8700/ 2006 the order dated o2.o3.raoe-4%' Qmzgzoo

v)/son/4o/90/2004415 whion 'gas ¢ counts, firstly that thero >no i'nateriVa_1 the process of passing there was an inordinate delay 'petition, by order dated aggrieved by the said 1216/ 2006 which was ®ted& o9.%%o4.2oo7. In that View of . ﬁled by the first petitioner cja-'JiI_1g 'qiieotioiiv the very same order dated . .. _ _ "€}'é.£}"8¢2"O.Q4 but be abuse of process of court. ';P¢£ii;ioners 2 and 8 have called in question the emo dated o2.o8.2oo4 by filing this petition on VTQ€3.O2.2009. The inordinate delay of ﬁve years in cllaﬁmagng the order in the absence of satisfactory explanation the writ petition must g,

-4.

In the circumstances, these ¢%am dismissed with cost of Rs. 5,000/~. swk

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court