Poorna Pragna Vidya Samstae vs Sri. Ganapathi Bhat on 9 March, 2022

[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Poorna Pragna Vidya Samstae vs Sri. Ganapathi Bhat on 9 March, 2022

Bench: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                           BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

       WRIT PETITION No.29040 OF 2017 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

1. Poorna Pragna Vidya Samstae
Rajndranagar,
Chithradurga
Represented by its Secretary,
Smt. D.B. Veena
W/o. Rangaswamy,
Rajendranagar,
Near Ambedkar Kalyam Mantap,
Chithradurga - 577501.

2. Poorna Pragna Vidya Samstae
Rajndranagar,
Near Ambedkar Kalyan Mantap
Chithradurga
Poorna Pragnya Sanskrit College,
Represented by its President,
Sri.K. Bheemappa,
Sri. Poorna Pragna Vidya Samsthae,
Rajendranagar,
Near Ambedkar Kalyam Mantap,
Chithradurga - 577501.
                                     ..   Petitioners

(By Sri. Sagar B.B., Advocate)

AND:

Sri. Ganapathi Bhat,
S/o. Seetharam Bhattam,
                                                 W.P.No.29040/2017
                                2


Aged about 53 years,
Assistant Professor,
Sri. Poorna Pragna Vidya Samthae,
Rajendra nagar,
Near Ambedkar Kalian Mantap,
Chitradurga - 577501.
                                                .. Respondent

(By Sri.S.C. Vijay Kumar, Advocate)

                                 ****
      This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari
quashing the impugned order dated 20-06-2017 passed in
Ex.Pt.25/2016 pending on the file of Principal District and
Sessions Judge at Chithradurga vide Annexure N in the interest
of justice and equity, etc.

      This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in 'B'
Group, through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing,
this day, the Court made the following:

                           ORDER

Learned counsels from both side are present physically in the Court.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners files a memo stating that, in view of the fact that the Execution Petition from which the present writ petition has arisen, has now stood closed, at the default of the decree holder, the present writ petition becomes infructuous. However, the W.P.No.29040/2017 3 petitioners have sought for reserving liberty to file a fresh writ petition, in case the said Execution Petition is restored in the Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioners makes similar submission in his oral submission.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent, after going through the memo submits his 'no objection' to consider the memo.

4. In view of the memo and the supporting submission of the learned counsel from both sides, reserving liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh writ petition, in case the alleged Execution Petition No.25/2016 which is said to have been closed by the orders of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, being restored, the present writ petition stands disposed of as having become infructuous.

Sd/-

JUDGE BMV*

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court