Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 27751 (KAR)

SRI VEDANANDA MURTHY v. SRI CHIDANANDIAH B T

WP/20867/2021 · 2026-07-10

Vijaykumar A Patil

Original Suitbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35030 W.P. No.20867/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.20867/2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. VEDANANDA MURTHY S/O LATE THOTAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT. NO.48/43, 6TH MAIN ROAD JNANAJYOTHINAGAR JNANABHARATHI BANGALORE – 560056. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHANKARLINGAPPA NAGARAJ, ADV., [ABSENT]) AND: 1. SRI. CHIDANANDIAH B.T. S/O LATE THOTAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT. BACHIHALLI DUGADIHALLI POST CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE – 572214. 2. SMT. SHIVALINGAMMA W/O HAMALINGAIAH @ MUDDGOWDA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT. VADDARA MALLENHALLI SUGUR POST, TIPTUR TALUK TUMKUR DIST – 572214. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35030 W.P. No.20867/2021 3. SMT. SIDDALINGAMMA W/O B.T. MURTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT. BYADARAHALLI J.C. PURA POST CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TUMKUR DIST – 572214. 4. SRI. PRAVEEN B.C. S/O CHIDANANDAIAH @ CHIDANANDA MURTHY R/AT. NO.819/6, 6TH E CROSS RAJAJINGAR, BANGALORE-560010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH N.R. ADV., FOR R1 V/O/DTD:01.12.2021, NOTICE TO R2 TO R4 STANDS D/W) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 15.09.2021 PASSED ON IA NO.19 IN O.S.NO.6613/2018 ON THE FILE OF XIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, AND CONCURRENT CHARGE OF XXXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH28 AND CCH 39) AT ANNEXURE-G & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35030 W.P. No.20867/2021 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER There is no representation for the petitioner today. 2. Even on 18.06.2026, there was no representation for the petitioner. 3. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28