Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51160 (KAR)

SMT. MOHINI KHARVI v. SRI. DASA @ MINNA KHARVI

WP/12291/2024 · 2025-12-09

S Vishwajith Shetty

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52166 WP No. 12291 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 12291 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. MOHINI KHARVI D/O LATE CHANDRA KHARVI W/O BABU NAIK AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/A GANAPAYYA COMPOUND BAHUDRUSHA ROAD KUNDAPURA KASABA VILLAGE KUNDAPURA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201. 2. BABU NAIK S/O LATE LINGA NAIK AGED ABOUT 78 YEWARS R/A GANAPAYYA COMPOUND BAHUDRUSHA ROAD KUNDAPURA KASABA VILLAGE KUNDAPURA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201. 3. SMT. VIMALA D/O BABU NAIK AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/A GANAPAYYA COMPOUND BAHUDRUSHA ROAD KUNDAPURA KASABA VILLAGE KUNDAPURA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201. 4. SRI ASHOK S/O BABU NAIK AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/A GANAPAYYA COMPOUND BAHUDRUSHA ROAD KUNDAPURA KASABA VILLAGE KUNDAPURA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201. 5. SMT. LATHA D/O BABU NAIK Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52166 WP No. 12291 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/A GANAPAYYA COMPOUND BAHUDRUSHA ROAD KUNDAPURA KASABA VILLAGE KUNDAPURA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI HEGDE SUMANA MAHADEV, ADV., -ABSENT) AND: 1. SRI DASA @ MINNA KHARVI S/O LATE CHANDRA KHARVI AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/O KHARVI MELKERE KUNDAPURA KASABA VILLAGE KUNDAPURA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201. 2. SMT. SHANTI PATEL W/O GANAPATHI PATEL AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS KACHIKODU, GUJJADI VILLAGE KUNDAPURA, UDUPI DISTRICT -576 201. 3. SRI RAMAKRISHNA KHARVI S/O LATE CHANDRA KHARVI AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS BAHUDRUSHA ROAD KUNDAPURA KASBA VILLAGE KUNDAPURA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201. 4. SMT. RAJEEVI TANDELA W/O MADHAVA TANDELA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS KASARGODU TOKA POST HONNAVARA TALUK U.K. DISTRICT - 581 338. 5. SMT. SUMITHRA KHARVI W/O NARASIMHA KHARVI AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS NEAR BHAJANA MANDIRA KODI, KUNDAPURA UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 217. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52166 WP No. 12291 of 2024 6. SMT. JANNI KHARVI W/O SHANKAR NAIK AGED ABOUT 56 YEWARS NEAR MAHAKALI TEMPLE MADHYKERI, KUNDAPURA UDUPI DISTRCT - 576 201. 7. a. SMT. SHOBHA KHARVI SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES GOPAL MESTHA S/O NAGAPPA MESTHA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. b. SANTHOSH S/O GOPAL MESTHA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS. c. ADITHYA S/O GOPAL MESTHA AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS. d. CHETHANA D/O GOPAL MESTHA AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN AND FATHER GOPAL MESTHA WHO IS RESPONDENT NO.7(A) ALL ARE R/A JAI SANTHOSHA MATHA UDYAMA NAGAR, HONNAVARA POST AND TALUK, UTTARA KANNADA - 581 334. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K. CHANDRAKANTH ARIGA, ADV., FOR C/R-1 & R-3;) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DELIVERY WARRANT DTD 14.02.2024 AS MENTIONED IN ANNEXURE-A HEREIN PASSED BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KUNDAPURA. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52166 WP No. 12291 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Matter called twice. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. 2. This Court on 27.11.2025 had passed the following order:- "Matter is listed for the 4th time before this Court for non-compliance of office objections. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Though this Court is not inclined to grant further time to comply office objections, by way of indulgence, finally a week's time is granted to comply office objections. It is made clear that by the next date of hearing, if the office objections are not complied, the petition shall be dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. List this petition on 09.12.2025." 3. Even on this date, office objections have not been complied and there is no representation on behalf of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52166 WP No. 12291 of 2024 petitioners. Having regard to the aforesaid and also having regard to the peremptory order passed by this Court on 27.11.2025, this Court has no other option but to dismiss the petition for non-prosecution. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17