- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20838 W.P. No.19404/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.19404/2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: IMRAN SHARIEEF S/O LATE AHMED SHARIEEF AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NO. 1ST CROSS SANJAY COLONY, NEW TOWN ROAD BADRAVATHI-577 302. PRESENTLY AT: ENGLISH GATE ACADEMY RIYADH GALLERY, OLAY ROAD 4TH FLOOR, OFFICE NO. 410 P.O. BOX NO. 240504 RIYADH 11322 KINGDOM OF SAUDHI ARABIA. REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. UMMER SHARIEFF S/O LATE AHAMED SHARIEFF AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 10 DS MAX STAR WOODS KEREGUDDADA HALLI ABBIGERE MAIN ROAD BANGALORE-560 090. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GAONKAR DINESH NEELKANT AND SMT. SHEETHALA D. NAYAK, ADVS., [ABSENT]) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20838 W.P. No.19404/2022 AND: 1. MOHAMMED ASIF MUJEER SIDDIQUE S/O LATE M. NAZEER AHAMED AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NO. 230, 12TH CROSS DR. R.M.L. NAGAR, 1ST CROSS SMNP WARD NO. 27 SHIVAMOGGA-577 202. 2. M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA NEHRU ROAD BRANCH SHIVAMOGGA NOW AT SARVODAYA NEAR HOTEL SURYA COMPLEX DEAN DAYAL ROAD, DURGI GUDI SHIVAMOGGA-577 207 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER/ AUTHORIZED OFFICER. 3. MR. IRFAN EBRAHIM S/O K.B. EBRAHIM AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT SAVAYEE PALYA JAMBOOR MOHALLA SHIVAMOGGA CITY-577 207. …RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DTD 28.01.2022 ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM SHIVAMOGGA IN O.S.NO.164/2019 IN RESPECT OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE DTD 04.09.2017 ANNEXURE-C AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY OF LAW AND DIRECT THE COURT BELOW TO PERMIT THE PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER HEREIN TO MARK THE SAID AGREEMENT IN EVIDENCE & ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20838 W.P. No.19404/2022 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER There is no representation for the petitioner when the matter is called in the morning session as well as in the afternoon session. 2. The orders dated 15.09.2023 and 01.09.2025 also indicate that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 3. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11