Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13600 (KAR)

MRS SONA PRIYA v. AHWATHAPPA SOUHARDA CREDIT

WP/34109/2024 · 2026-03-25

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17078 WP No. 34109 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.34109 OF 2024 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. MRS. SONA PRIYA, W/O. KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 2. MR. KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY S/O. SRINIVASA RAO, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 3. MRS. BORRA VIJAYA DURGA S/O. BORRA SRINIVASA RAO, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 3 R/O.NO.P-1, SONA GRANDEUR APARTMENT, MLA LAYOUT, KALENA AGRAHARA, B.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 076. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAGARAJ SHETTY, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17078 WP No. 34109 of 2024 AND: M/S. ASHWATHAPPA SOUDARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., MAGADI MAIN ROAD, PRINCIPAL BRANCH NO.1206, RANGANATHA COMPLEX, 12TH CROSS, M.C. LAYOUT, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 040. REPRSENTED BY SATISH KUMAR H.S., AUTHORIZED OFFICER. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHIVASHANKARA. A, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH BY ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED VII ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.9722/2024 DTD 23.11.2024 UNDER SEC 14 OF THE SECURITIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 VIDE ANNX AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17078 WP No. 34109 of 2024 ORAL ORDER When the matter came up on 24.03.2026, as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for dismissal'. 2. Today when the matter is called out, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners in the forenoon as well as in the afternoon. It appears that the petitioners are not interested to pursue the matter. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is 'dismissed for non-prosecution'. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61