Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Sahan S Malagi vs The Commissioner on 2 August, 2017

Author: Vineet Kothari

Bench: Vineet Kothari

                           1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2017

                        BEFORE:

       THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI


       WRIT PETITION No.29821 of 2016 (LB-BMP)


BETWEEN:

Sri. Sahan S.Malagi,
Aged About 46 Years,
S/o. Sri. S.H. Malagi,
R/at No.525, III 'A' Main Road, OMBR Layout,
Banasawadi, Bengaluru-560 043,
Represented by his GPA Holder
Sri. S.H. Malagai,
Aged about 77 years,
s/o. late Hanumanthappa,
r/at No.525, III 'A' Main Road,
OMBR Layout, Banasawadi,
Bengaluru-560 043.                    ... PETITIONER

[By Sri. Shivaramu H.C., Adv.]


AND:

1. The Commissioner,
    Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike,
    Hudson Circle,
    Bengaluru-560 002.

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer,
   Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike,
   Palike Ward No.27,
   Bengaluru-560 043.
                          Order dated: 02.08.2017 in WP No.29821/2016
                                                Sri. Sahan S.Malagi Vs.
                                              The Commissioner & Ors.

                             2/3

3. Smt. K.T. Geetha,
   Aged about 60 years,
   w/o. Balagoplan,
   r/at No.521, III 'A" Main Road,
   OMBR Layout,
   Banasawadi,
   Bengaluru-560 043.                      ... RESPONDENTS

[By Sri. T.Jayaprakash, Adv. for R1 & R2.
    Sri. Dhananjay Joshi, Adv. for R3.]


                             ***


       This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India praying to quash the
impugned order dated 24.02.2016 passed by the
Karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bengaluru in Appeal
No.1041/13 produced at Annexure-"E" and allow the I.A.
filed under Order 1, Rule 10(2) of CPC filed by the
petitioner directing respondent No.3 to implead the
petitioner as necessary party in the appeal.

      This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day the
court made the following:


                            ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo, praying to dismiss the petition as it becomes infructuous.

2. The memo is taken on record. The opposite counsel has no objection.

Order dated: 02.08.2017 in WP No.29821/2016 Sri. Sahan S.Malagi Vs. The Commissioner & Ors.

3/3

The petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/-

JUDGE Ksm*