Karnataka High Court
Sri B R Ramesh vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2017
Bench: Chief Justice, P.S.Dinesh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 7th day of September, 2017
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE MR SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P S DINESH KUMAR
Writ Appeal Nos 861 of 2015
& 3166 of 2016 (SC/ST)
BETWEEN :
SRI B R RAMESH
S/O B RANGAIAH SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT NO 679, L V NILAYA
2ND CROSS, M G ROAD
CHICKBALLAPUR
CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101 ... APPELLANT
(Sri B R Ramesh - absent)
AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-1
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
BANGALORE-560009
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION
DODDABALLAPURA-561 203
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
2
4. SRI KRISHNA MURTHY
VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT
KANNAMANGALA PANCHAYTHI
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
DEVANAHALLI-562 110
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
5. THE NILGIRI DIARY
(BANGALORE) PVT LTD
REGD OFFICE, AT NO 171
BRIGADE ROAD
BANGALORE-560001
REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI C KUMAR
S/O M CHENNIPPAN
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
6. SRI NARASIMHAIAYYA
AGED 47 YEARS
R/AT POOJANAHALLI VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 110
7. MUNIYAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
(a) RAMESH
S/O MUNIYAPPA
AGED 39 YEARS
(b) NARASAMMA
D/O MUNIYAPPA
AGED 48 YEARS
(c) MADDURAMMA
D/O MUNIYAPPA
AGED 46 YEARS
RESPONDENT No 7(a) TO (c) ARE
R/AT POOJANAHALLI VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
3
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DIST-562110 ... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri V G Bhanuprakash, AGA, for R-1 to 3;
Sri K Suman, Advocate, for R5)
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 3649 OF 2008 DATED 02/02/2015.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Mr K N Nitish, learned advocate, appearing for Mr K V Narasimhan, learned advocate for the appellant, submits that their client has taken the brief from them and they have no instructions to proceed with these appeals. We are, further, informed that they have endorsed their 'no-objection' to enable the appellant to engage any other lawyer.
2. As prayed for by Mr Nitish, Mr K V Narasimhan, learned advocate, is permitted to retire from these appeals.
4
3. The matter was called on for hearing. None appears for the appellant. No accommodation is, also, sought for.
4. In the circumstances, the writ appeals are dismissed for default.
5. In view of dismissal of the writ appeals, all pending interlocutory applications do not survive for consideration and they are, also, dismissed accordingly.
6. We make no order as to costs.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE *pjk