Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17248 (KAR)

MRS THIPPAMMA v. THE BANK MANAGER

WP/4757/2022 · 2026-03-25

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16889 WP No. 4757 of 2022 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. 4757 OF 2022 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. MRS. THIPPAMMA W/O LATE C.M.RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/O SANTHE BAZARA, MAYAKONDA VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK - 577 534 2. MR. R.MADAPPA S/O LATE C.M.RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O MAYAKONDA VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK - 577 534 3. MRS. M.S.SHASHIKALA D/O LATE C.M.RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 1650/60, 15TH CROSS, ANJENAYA LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE TALUK - 577 004 4. MR. SWAMY S/O LATE C.M.RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/O 730, SUNAGARA HATTI MAYAKONDA VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK - 577 004 5. MR. C.R.RAGHAVENDRA S/O LATE C.M.RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16889 WP No. 4757 of 2022 R/A 730, SUNAGARA HATTI MAYAKONDA VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK - 577 534 6. MRS.TEJASWINI LOHITH @ MANJULA D/O LATE C.M.RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS W/O LOHITH KUMAR R/O 73, 12TH MAIN, 19TH CROSS, HSR LAYOUT SECTOR - 7, BANGALORE SOUTH - 560 102 …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. SOWMYA R., ADVOCATE FOR SINGHANIA & CO., - ABSENT) AND: THE BANK MANAGER CANARA BANK MAYAKONDA VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 534 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO STOP THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AS PER ANNEXURE-D. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16889 WP No. 4757 of 2022 ORAL ORDER When the matter came up on 23.03.2026, as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption for ‘dismissal’. Today also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. It appears that the petitioners are not interested to pursue the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE PKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55