- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39399 WP No. 9824 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO.9824 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. T. R. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LAE RANGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST AND L.I.C. AGENT THYAGARAJA COLONY, SHANIVARASANTHE TOWN, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT. 2. SRI. T. R. YOGESH S/O LATE RANGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST THOYALLI VILLAGE, SHANIVARASANTHE HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT. 3. SRI. T. R. SURESH S/O LATE RANGE GOWDAA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, THOYALLI VILALGE, SHANIVARASANTHE HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASHANTH P N., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39399 WP No. 9824 of 2022 AND: SRI. T. R. GIRISH S/O LATE RANGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST DUNDALLI VILLAGE, SHANIVARASANTHE HOBLI, SOMARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21.12.2021, PASSED ON I.A.NO.V FILED UNDER SECTION 10 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PASSED IN O.S.NO.138/13, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE, SOMWARPET, PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A, FOR BEING ARBITRARY, CAPACIOUS, BEING JUDICIALLY REASONED MUCH AGAINST TO THE SETTLED PRINCIPLES OF LAW ON THE ISSUE AND ETC THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO ORAL ORDER This Court, by order dated 21.03.2025, taking note of non-compliance of office objections had passed the following order:- "At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, finally, two weeks time is - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39399 WP No. 9824 of 2022 granted to remove the office objections, failing which, the appeal stand dismissed." 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners is present. Even today, learned counsel for the petitioners has not complied the office objections and seeks for an adjournment. 3. His request for an adjournment is not considered. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE MH/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23