- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14686 WP No. 105931 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 105931 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. BRIJESH @ SHOBHARAJ S/O ASHOK RAMANNAVAR, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. PVT. SERVICE, R/O. H.NO.40, MEGHANA BUILDING, 1ST CROSS, VIDHYA NAGAR, ANGOL, BELGAUM-590 006. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. DEEPAK MAGANUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI MAHADEV LAXMAN BHOSALE, AGE. 66 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. 43/22, TANAJI GALLI, BELGAUM-590 001. 2. VAISHALI W/O LATE VINOD KENKARE, AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE, R/O. H.NO.43/22, TANAJI GALLI, BELGAUM, PIN CODE-590 001. 3. SHRI. ABHISHAKE S/O VINOD KENKARE, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O. H.NO.43/22, TANAJI GALLI, BELGAUM-590 001. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.H. YADWAD, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING TO RESTORE THE MISC.2/2016 ON THE FILE OF IX ADJ, BELGAVI BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION DATED 03.08.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14686 WP No. 105931 of 2024 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner assailing the order dated 03.08.2019 passed in Misc.No.2/2016 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Belgaum. 2. The petitioner seeks to set aside the order, which dismissed the miscellaneous petition dismissing the petition to restore the order dismissing R.A.No.186/2014 on the file of Principal District Judge, Belgaum, for non-prosecution on the ground that there was no representation. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Regular Appeal had been transferred from one Court in Belgaum to another Court. When the case was called in the transferee Court, the appellant’s counsel was not present, and accordingly, it was dismissed for non-prosecution. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was a delay of one year in filing the said miscellaneous petition. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14686 WP No. 105931 of 2024 Instead of moving to recall the order dismissing the miscellaneous petition, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 5. This Court is not convinced as to how the present petition is maintainable. The petitioner could have moved before the very same Court in which the miscellaneous petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. Hence, the writ petition is not entertained, and is dismissed accordingly. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE PMP CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 3