- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:486 WP No. 44825 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 44825 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. K.JAYAMMA W/O LATE SRI KOTLA HANUMANTHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/@ PEDDAGUVALAPALLI , REDDAM MANDAL, PENUKONDA TALUK, ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT 2. SMT N.YASHODHAMMA W/O NAGEPALLI THIMMA REDDY D/O LATE SRI KOTLA HANUMANTHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/@ 24-01-01, MOTHUKAPALLI HINDUPUR MANDAL ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT-515 123 3. SRI SRINIVASULU S/O LATE SRI KOTLA HANUMANTHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/@ PEDDDAGUVALAPALLI, REDDAM MANDAL, PENUKONDA TALUK, ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT-515 123 4. SRI K.RAJASHEKHARA REDDY S/O LATE SRI KOTLA HANUMANTHA REDDY R/@ PEDDAGUVALAPALLI, REDDADM MANDAL, PENUKONDA TALUK, ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT-515 123 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SIDDESHA N., ADVOCATE- ABSENT) AND: 1. SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O SRI M.THIMMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:486 WP No. 44825 of 2018 2. SMT GOVINDAMMA W/O SRI RAMAREDDY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 3. SMT ANUSUYAMMA W/O SRI S NAGIREDDY AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, ALL ARE R/@ MOTHUKAPALLI VILLAGE HINDUPUR MANDAL ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.N.NANJAREDDY, ADVOCATE FOR IA 1/18 R1-R2 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED V/O/D 13/2/2020 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R3 HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.10.2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, PAVAGADA, ON I.A.NO.35/17 IN O.S.NO.12/2010 ANNEXURE-D. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ‘DISMISSAL’, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER This writ petition is of the year 2018. Even till today, the learned counsel for the petitioners has not furnished the PF for issuance of notice to the respondents. The matter was listed before this Court for orders. On 06.01.2025, as there was no representation on behalf of both the parties, this matter was directed to be listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal’. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:486 WP No. 44825 of 2018 2. Today also there is no representation on behalf of both the parties. It appears that the petitioners are not interested to pursue the matter. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11