Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 88533 (KAR)

JBF RAK LLC v. GANAPATHY INDUSTRIES

WP/14547/2024 · 2025-10-31

S Vishwajith Shetty

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43823 WP No. 14547 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 14547 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. JBF RAK LLC OFFICE AT POST BOX NO.6574 AL JAZEERA, AL HAMRA RAS AI KHAIMAH, UNITED ARAB EMIRATED, REP. BY ITS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE MR. SUNIL SHUKLA S/O MR. TRIBHUVANNATH SHUKLA AGED 54 YEARS R/AT A-401, J.P. DECKS NEXT TO DINDOSHI COURT, GENERAL A.K. VAIDYA MARG. MALAD EAST, MUMBAI - 400 097. 2. JBF BAHRAIN W.L.L OFFICE AT BLDG 461 ROAD 1508, BLOCK 115 ALHIDD, BLLP SALMAN IND CITY BAHRAIN RP. BY ITS LEGAL REESENTATIVE MR. SUNIL SHUKLA S/O MR. TRIBHUVANNATH SHUKLA AGED 54 YEARS R/AT A-401, J P DECKS NEX TO DINDOSHI COURT, GENERAL A.K. VAIDYA MARK, MALAD EAST MUMBAI - 400 097. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI CHETAN TAYAL, ADV., - ABSENT) AND: GANAPATHY INDUSTRIES HAVING ITS OFFICE AT FACTORY NO.31, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB, YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE KARNATAKA56022, INDIA. …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43823 WP No. 14547 of 2024 (BY SRI DECLYN GOMES, ADV., - ABSENT) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING OR SETTING ASIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.01.2024 BY THE HONBLE JUDGE SHRI.S.J.KRISHNA PRESIDING IN LXXXIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU. 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 petitioner. 2. This Court on 15.09.2025 has granted a week's time to comply office objections with an observation that failing compliance, petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. 3. Even as on this date, office objections have not been complied and therefore, in view of the order passed by this Court on 15.09.2025, 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.: 14