Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89225 (KAR)

KARNATAKA STATE ROAD v. S.V. SIDDALINGAPPA

WP/19812/2017 · 2025-12-12

Jyoti M

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52977 WP No. 19812 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 19812 OF 2017 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION CHIKMAGALUR DIVISION CHIKMAGALUR BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER REP.BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER …PETITIONER (BY SMT. RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. S.V.SIDDALINGAPPA, S/O. VEERAPPA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR'S 1(A). M.N.BASAMMA, W/O. S.V.SIDDALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O. SATTIGARAHALLI VILLAGE, KARLE POST - 573120 KATTAYA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT 1(B). S.S.JYOTHI, D/O. LATE S.V.SIDDALINGAPPA, W/O. GIRISH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O. GOVINDANAHALLI (MARGONAHALLI VILLAGE) KIKKERI HOBLI Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52977 WP No. 19812 of 2017 K.R.PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT 1(C). S.S.ROOPA, D/O. LATE S.V.SIDDALINGAPPA, W/O. M.E.BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O. MUKUNDUR VILLAGE (MALLADEVENAPURA) VILLAGE, KARLE POST -573120 KATTAYA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.P.RAMESHA, ADVOCATE R1(A TO C) AMENDED CAUSE TITLE AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 07.12.2022) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR FINAL DISPOSAL, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Smt.Renuka H.R., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.S.P.Ramesha, counsel for the respondent appeared in person. 2. Counsel appearing for the respective parties jointly submits that the matter has been settled amicably and a joint memo has been filed. Counsel further submits that the joint - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52977 WP No. 19812 of 2017 memo may be placed on record and the writ petition be disposed of in terms of the joint memo. 3. When queried, Sri.S.P.Ramesha, counsel submits that a conscious decision is taken by respondents 1(A to C) about the settlement and they have given instruction to him to file a joint memo. If the petition is disposed of in terms of joint memo, respondents 1(A to C) shall not seek recalling of the order or file a review petition. 4. The submission is made by Sri S.P.Ramesha, is place on record , the joint memo is taken on record. 5. The Writ petition is disposed of in terms of the joint memo. For Compliance of the award, three months time is granted. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38