Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

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

Karnataka High Court

M/S Sri Bhagya Fish Seed Farm vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 October, 2018

Bench: Raghvendra S.Chauhan, B M Shyam Prasad

                            1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2018

                        PRESENT

 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN

                           AND

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M. SHYAM PRASAD

         WRIT APPEAL NO.1626 OF 2018(GM-RES)


BETWEEN:

M/S SRI. BHAGYA FISH SEED FARM
REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER
MR. C. NATARAJU
SALUHUNASE VILLAGE
SUGURU POST, DHARMAPURA HOBLI
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
                                         ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. L. SRINIVASA BABU, ADVOCATE)



AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
       VIKASA SOUDHA
       BENGALURU-560 001.

2.     THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
       PODIUM BLOCK
       VISHVESHWARAIAH TOWERS
       DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
       BENGALURU-560 001.
                               2




3.    THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FISHERIES
      CIRCLE-2, VANIVILAS SAGAR
      CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-572 144.
                                            ... RESPONDENTS

      THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 25.01.2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN WP NO.60561 OF 2016 [GM-RES] AND ALLOW THE
SAID WRIT PETITION BY GRANTING THE RELIEF AS SOUGHT
THEREIN. THE WA PAPERS WERE NOTIFIED ON 27.06.2018
FOR RECTIFICATION OF OFFICE OBJECTIONS. THE COUNSEL
FOR   THE   APPELLANT   HAS       NOT   COMPLIED   WITH   THE
FOLLOWING OFFICE OBJECTION/S EVEN AFTER EXPIRY OF
THREE WEEKS AS REQUIRED UNDER RULE 14(1) OF CHAPTER
12 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA RULE 1959.

      THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:



                        JUDGMENT

Since the order dated 29.08.2018, has not been complied with despite the fact that sufficient time has been given for the learned counsel for the appellant for 3 complying with the office objections, the appeal stands dismissed.

SD/-

JUDGE SD/-

JUDGE nv