Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13257 (KAR)

SMT. UMME HAFSA v. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL OFFICER

WP/25092/2025 · 2026-02-24

Ashok S Kinagi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11572 WP No. 25092 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 25092 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: SMT. UMME HAFSA D/O MOHAMMED YOUSUF AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS HOUSE WIFE NO.7/1 5TH STREET HALSURU HAL 11STAGE BENGALURU-560002 KARNATAKA …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATISHKUMAR K., ADV.) AND: THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL OFFICER IMA AND OTHER KPIDFE ACT CASES, 3RD FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK, Digitally signed by SHILPABAI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11572 WP No. 25092 of 2025 V.V. TOWER, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001 …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE NOTICE BEARING NO. SPLOCA/IMA/ENQ-1/08/2025-26 DATED 12.06.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT - SPECIAL OFFICER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER THE KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 2004, AS BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL, AND IN VIOLATION OF THE PETITIONER'S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER ARTICLES 14, 19 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: *** - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11572 WP No. 25092 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER This writ petition was filed on 11.08.2025. The office has raised the objections. Despite granting sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, he did not comply with the office objections. The matter was listed on 17.02.2026. On 17.02.2026, none appeared for the petitioner. Finally, a week’s time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which, the petition shall be listed for dismissal. 2. Even today, the case was called twice. None appears for the petitioner. In view of the peremptory order, the writ petition is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB