Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 82591 (KAR)

G K RADHAKRISHNA v. S SMITHA @ KRUPA B.A BED

WP/12901/2019 · 2025-07-23

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28065 WP No. 12901 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 12901 OF 2019 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: G. K. RADHAKRISHNA PARTY IN PERSON S/O. KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, 1059, 1ST CROSS, SHIVANANJAPPA LAYOUT, MANDYA-571 401 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G K RADHAKRISHNA - PARTY-IN-PERSON (ABSENT) AND: S. SMITHA @ KRUPA B.A. BED D/O. SATHYA NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS NO.173, OPP SIDDI VINAYAKA TEMPLE, NETHAJI NAGAR, ALANHALLI, T.NARASIPURA ROAD, MYSORE-570026 …RESPONDENT THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN MC NO.649 OF 2015, ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED IST ADDL PRINCIPAL FAMILY COURT MYSORE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28065 WP No. 12901 of 2019 ORAL ORDER This is the Writ Petition of 2019, the petitioner wants to appear as party-in-person and for that he has to appear before the party-in-person committee. The proceedings dated 07.04.2025 of the committee reveals that party-in-person was absent and contacted him over his registered mobile number to confirm that the listing of his case for his appearance before the Committee had been communicated to him. He had sought for adjournment for a week due to his personal inconvenience. Hence, adjourned. Thereafter also, he has not appeared before the Committee. When the matter came up before the Court on 18.07.2025, as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption 'dismissal' for today. Today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the matter. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE KA, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9