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

Mr.Krishna Jattappa Naik vs The Commissioner on 29 February, 2016

Author: G.Narendar

Bench: G.Narendar

                             -1-
                                     W.A. No.100587/2015



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016

                         PRESENT

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH

                             AND

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

        WRIT APPEAL No.100587/2015 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN

MR.KRISHNA JATTAPPA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
SON OF MR.JATTAPPA NAIK,
PROP:POOJA DEPARTMENTAL STORES,
CTS#201, CD DESHMUKH ROAD,
BELAGAVI 590 001.
                                             ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. P V GUNJAL, ADV.)

AND

1.    THE COMMISSIONER,
      BELAGAVI CITY CORPORATION,
      SUBHAS NAGAR, 4821/27A,
      RS 1005, BELAGAVI 590016.

2.    OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ESTATES),
      BELAGAVI CITY CORPORATION,
      BELAGAVI 590 001,
      BY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER.
                                          ... RESPONDENTS

     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED:21.05.2015, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN
WP.NO.21776/2015 AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE NOTICE
DATED:13.05.2015 BEARING NO.MANABE / KAMSHA / MARKET /
                             -2-
                                        W.A. No.100587/2015


SR / 2015-16, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. AUTHORITY AS
BEING ARBITRARY AND CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE
KARNATAKA MUNICIPALITIES ACT AND HENCE IS ILLEGAL AND
NOT SUSTAINABLE.

      THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
H.G. RAMESH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):

None appears for the appellant though the appeal is called for the second time. Notice was ordered in this appeal on 25.11.2015. Till date, counsel appearing for the appellant has not furnished process fee etc. for issue of notice to the respondents. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE MBS/-