- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50098 WP No. 6951 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 6951 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI KRISHNAIAH S/O GARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. 2. SRI HANUMANTHAIAH S/O GARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. BOTH ARE R/AT SANGANABASAVANADODDI VILLAGE, MAYAGANAHALLI POST KASABAHOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI RAMAMOORTHY C, ADV.-ABSENT) AND: 1. SRI NAGARAJU S/O GIRIYAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS SMT. SHANTHAMANI M.C W/O LATE NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.499/2 NEW KAVIKA LAYOUT BAPUJINAGAR NEAR GEETHASHRAMA BENGALURU - 560 026. 2. SMT. SAKAMMA W/O GIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS. Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50098 WP No. 6951 of 2024 3. SRI VENKATALAKSHMAMMA D/O GIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS ANKANAHALLI VILLAGE KOOTAGALHOBLI RAMANAGARA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. 4. SMT LEELAVATHI D/O GIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS ITTAMADU VILLAGE BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. 5. SMT. GOWRAMMA D/O GIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT SANGANABASAVANADODDI VILLAGE, MAYAGANAHALLI POST KASABA HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. 6. SRI A. SITA RAMA RAO AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS SON OF SRI VENKATAPPA RAO RESIDINGA T NO.85/1 SHIVA SHAKTHI BUILDING 4TH FLOOR, K H ROAD DOUBLE ROAD BANGALORE - 560 027. 7. SRI C SREENIVASA REDDY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE CHINNAPPA R/AT NO 105/17, 1ST FLOOR 12TH MAIN ROAD BTM LAYOUT, 1ST STAGE BANGALORE - 560 029. 8. RANGASWAMY S/O RANGAIAH DEAD BY HIS LRS. SMT. VENKATALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE RANGASWAMI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50098 WP No. 6951 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. 9. SRI RANGANATHA S/O LATE RANGASWAMI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS. RESPONDENT NO.8 AND 9 ARE R/AT ANKAHALLI, YERAHALLI POST KOOTAGALHOBLI, RAMANGARA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. 10. SMT. PREMA D/O LATE RANGASWAMY W/O CHANDRA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT NAGARAKALLU VILLAGE DODDAGANGAWADI POST KOOTAGALHOBLI, RAMANAGARAM RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. AND ALSO R/AT LAKSHMIVENKATESHWARANILAYA 27TH WARD, 3RD STAGE, JEEGENAHALLI SHANTHILAL LAYOUT, NEAR WATER TANK RAYARADODDI SHIVAJINAGARA RAMANGARA TOWN, RAMANGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. 11. SMT. KALAVATHI D/O LATE RANGASWAMY W/O NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/O AJJANAHALLI POST MADABALHOBLI, MAGADITALUK RAMANGARA DISTRICT - 562 120. 12. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER COMPETENT AUTHORITY, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORTI NH-275 BASAVANAPURA VILLAGE KASABAHOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. 13. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER COMPETENT AUTHORITY N.H. NO.948, A BENGALURU RING ROAD - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50098 WP No. 6951 of 2024 MALAVALLI ROAD, T B P V PLAZA CHILUR GATE, KANAKAPURA RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED PRAYING TOSET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18/12/2023 PASSED ON IA NO. 21 FILED UNDER ORDER VI, RULE 17 OF CPC IN OS NO. 29/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SNR. CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A. 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 is called twice. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Even on the last date of hearing, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners. On 25.11.2025, this Court has passed the following order:- "There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. This petition is listed for the 7th time for non- compliance of office objections. Though this Court is not inclined to grant further time to the learned counsel for the petitioners, by way of indulgence, matter is finally adjourned to 01.12.2025 and by the next date of hearing office objections are not cleared, the petition may be dismissed for non- compliance. List this petition on 01.12.2025." - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50098 WP No. 6951 of 2024 2. Even as on this date, office objections have not been complied and inspite of the matter being called twice today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Under the circumstances, this Court has no other option but to dismiss the petition for non-prosecution. Accordingly, petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22