- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26485 WP No. 20189 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 20189 OF 2023 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. B.M.K. INDUSTRIES A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN AND REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR:SRI. BASAVARAJ KURNAL AGE: MAJOR, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O NO.01/13171, DOTIHAL ROAD KUSTAGI POST KOPPAL DISTRICT-583 277. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHANTESH AWAJI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VIKAS SOUDHARDA CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED STATION ROAD, HOSPETE POST-583 201 BELLARY DISTRICT. REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. 2. SRI. JAYATEERTHACHAR S/O GURURAJACHAR AGE: MAJOR, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O NEAR RAGHAVENDRASWAMY MATH ACHAR STREET, KUSTAGI POST-583 277 KOPPAL DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (U/R 441), SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ARBITRATION COURT Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26485 WP No. 20189 of 2023 NO.246, MIDDLE OF 17 AND 18TH CROSS MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560 055. 4. SRI. K.M. SATISH S/O K.M. SADASHIVAYYA SINCE DEAD, REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS: 4(a) SMT. K.M.PURNIMA W/O LATE K.M. SATISH AGE 46 YEARS OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O 27TH WARD CHAPPARADAHALLI HOSPETE-583 202 BALLARY DISTRICT. 4(b) KUMARI K.M. SHRINIDHI D/O LATE K.M. SATISH AGE 18 YEARS OCCUPATION STUDENT R/O 27TH WARD CHAPPARADAHALLI HOSPETE-583 201 BELLARY DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PATIL KALYAN RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. YOGESH D.NAIK, AGA FOR R3) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27/06/2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPEAL NO.161/2021 UNDER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26485 WP No. 20189 of 2023 ORAL ORDER 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has taken back the files from him around six months back itself and he has no instructions to go on with the matter. 2. It is seen that the petitioner has not engaged the services of any other advocate. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. 3. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4