Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 53790 (KAR)

SHRI.FRNCIS S/O IMMANUEL ANTEN v. THE MANAGEMENT OF NWKRTC

WP/111763/2019 · 2025-11-18

Addl Registrar Judicial

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP NO. 111763/2019 (L - RES) IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD [SHRI.FRNCIS S/O IMMANUEL ANTEN VS. THE MANAGEMENT OF NWKRTC] 18.11.2025 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) CORAM: ADDL. REGISTRAR JUDICIAL ORAL ORDER Case is called out. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner is present and prays time to comply the office objections. As the case is listed today for dismissal for non-compliance of office objections and the costs of Rs.500/- was also already imposed by the Hon’ble Court on 17.02.2020, which was also not paid the learned Counsel was directed to pay the costs and produce the acknowledgment for having deposited the costs and the case was kept by. But, the learned Counsel has not produced the memo for having deposited the costs. The printout of the case in the CIS was also obtained to verify whether the Petitioner has filed the memo in the filing counter regarding the payment of costs. But, the Petitioner has not done so. Therefore, the further orders have to be passed in this case for non-compliance of office objections. As per Order dated : 07.11.2025, this case is listed on this day for dismissal for non-compliance of the office objections. On perusal of the records, it is seen that, this case is first listed for compliance of office objections on 29.08.2019. But, inspite of giving sufficient opportunity and inspite of specific order on 15.10.2025 and 07.11.2025 that, if the office - 2 - WP NO. 111763/2019 (L - RES) objections are not complied, the matter would be listed for dismissal on this day, the office objections are not complied. The conduct of the Petitioner shows that, the Petitioner is not interested in proceeding with the matter. As per Chapter-XII, Rule 14(2) of Karnataka High Court Rules, the Registrar has the power to pass a peremptory order of dismissal, if the compliance is not made within the time extended. As per Chapter-XII, Rule 14(3) of Karnataka High Court Rules, the party is entitled to apply for setting aside the peremptory order by making an application to the Court having assignment of the subject. Hence, the following Order is passed by exercising the powers as per Chapter-XII, Rule 14(2) of Karnataka High Court Rules. ORDER The Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is dismissed for non-compliance of the office objections, with no order as to costs. The Petitioner is entitled to apply for setting aside this Order by making an application to the Court having assignment of the subject as per Chapter-XII, Rule 14(3) of Karnataka High Court Rules, 1959. Sd/- (JERALD RUDOLPH MENDONCA) ADDL. REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL) & NOMIATED REGISTRAR List No.: 56 Sl No.: 44