Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2837 (KAR)

YAMANUR S/O NARASAPPA SAKA v. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSFC

WP/101803/2018 · 2025-03-05

Jyoti Mulimani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4253 WP No. 101803 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 101803 OF 2018 (GM-KSFC) BETWEEN: 1. YAMANUR S/O NARASAPPA SAKA, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: MANAGING DIRECTOR, NYS GRANITES IMPEX PVT. LTD., ADDRESS: NO.3557/58, WARD NO.5, 1ST FLOOR, NEW KOTWALPETH, AT: ILKAL-587 125, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2. SHRIKANT S/O NARAYANAPPA AILY, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: DIRECTOR, NYS GRANITES IMPEX PVT. LTD., ADDRESS: WARD NO.5, NEW KOTWALPETH, AT: ILKAL-587 125, DIST: BAGALKOT. 3. MAMATHA W/O YAMANUR SAKA, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: DIRECTOR, NYS GRANITES IMPEX PVT. LTD., ADDRESS: NO.3557/58, WARD NO.5, 1ST FLOOR, NEW KOTWALPETH, AT: ILKAL-587 125, DIST: BAGALKOT. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVAPRASAD B. SAJJAN, ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSFC© KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION (KSFC©) ADDRESS: KSFC© BHAVAN, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4253 WP No. 101803 of 2018 1/1, THIMMAIAH ROAD, AT: BENGALURU-560 052. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT ADDRESS: DISTRICT OFFICE COMPLEX, NAVNAGARA, AT: BAGALKOT-587 102. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (RECOVERY OF GOVT. DUES), KSFC BUILDING, P.B. ROAD, RAYAPURA, AT: DHARWAD-580 009. 4. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, KSFC©, ADDRESS: KSFC© BRANCH OFFICE, NO.37, 1ST FLOOR, OPPOSITE D.C. OFFICE, HOSPET ROAD, AT: KOPPAL-583 231. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MALA B.BHUTE, AGA FOR R2; SRI. PRAKASH S.UDIKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R3, R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER When the case is called, the petitioners are not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the petition was listed on 04.03.2025, on that day, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, either personally or - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4253 WP No. 101803 of 2018 through video conferencing. Hence, for appearance of counsel for the petitioners, the petition was ordered to be listed on 05.03.2025. The petition is listed today. As already noted above, when the case is called, the petitioners are not represented. It appears that the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP,CLK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 27