Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3228 (KAR)

CHANDRASHEKHAR RAMAPPA JADHAV v. SMT. SUNITHA W/O CHANDRASHEKHAR JADHAV

WP/101617/2025 · 2025-04-03

Jyoti Mulimani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5934 WP No. 101617 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 101617 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: CHANDRASHEKHAR RAMAPPA JADHAV, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: P.B.ROAD, OPP. SIDDAPPAJJAN TEMPLE, UNKAL, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 031. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTOSH S. HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAMESH.I.ZIRALI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SUNITHA W/O CHANDRASHEKHAR JADHAV, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: H.NO.12, VICTORIA ROAD, DAJIBANPETH, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 031. 2. AMITH S/O CHANDRASHEKHAR JADHAV, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: PVT. SERVICE, R/O: H.NO.12, VICTORIA ROAD, DAJIBANPETH, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 031. 3. ROHITH S/O CHANDRASHEKHAR JADHAV, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: H.NO.12, VICTORIA ROAD, DAJIBANPETH, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 031. 4. SMT. BABY W/O CHANDRASHEKHAR JADHAV, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: H.NO.26, DURGAD ONI, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5934 WP No. 101617 of 2025 UNKAL, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 031. 5. GOVIND S/O CHANDRASHEKHAR JADHAV, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O:H.NO.26, DURGAD ONI, UNKAL, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 031. 6. HARIKISHAN CHANDRASHEKHAR JADHAV, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O:H.NO.26, DURGAD ONI, UNKAL, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 031. … RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Santhosh.S.Hattikatagi., counsel on behalf of Sri.Ramesh.I.Zirali., for the petitioner has appeared in person. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Writ Petition may be dismissed as having become infructuous. When queried, counsel Sri.Santhosh.S.Hattikatagi, submits that a conscious decision is taken by advocate on record and the petitioner about infructuous of the petition and if - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5934 WP No. 101617 of 2025 an order is passed, they shall not seek for recalling the same or file a review petition. The oral submission made by counsel for the petitioner is placed on record. The Writ Petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE RH LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 11