- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010020002025 NC: 2026:KHC:37057 WP No. 611 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 611 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. MAYUR ENTERPRISES, PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGISTERED UNDER PARTNERSHIP ACT, HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT: NO.43 PADMASHREE, 2ND FLOOR, 3RD BLOCK, 3RD STAGE, BABAREESHWARA NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 079. 2. MRS. MADHURI TIRCOVALA, D/O. VISHNUMURTHY KOORMACHALAM, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT PLOT NO.36, NEW MARUTHI NAGAR, KOTHAPET, SAROOR NAGAR, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA-500 035. 3. MR. RAMESH KOORMAHALAM, S/O. VISHNUMURHTY KOORMACHALAM, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2-1-561/3, NALLKUNTA NEAR RAILWAY GATE, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA-500 035. 4. MR. C.N.RAMAKRISHNA, S/O. NAGAPPA, NO.100 FEET ROAD, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, REISIDING AT: CHIKKAGOWDANAPALYA, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010020002025 NC: 2026:KHC:37057 WP No. 611 of 2025 THALAGHATTAPURA, NEAR KANAKADASA CIRCLE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560 062. 5. MRS. SUJATHA GALIRAPPA, D/O. GALIRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT:NO.1, MARUTHI HIGH SCHOOL, TATAGUNI, BENGALURU-560 062. 6. MRS. SOWBHAGYA K., D/O. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDINGAT NO.25, 5TH CROSS, MANJUNATHA NAGAR, DODDAKALASANDRA, YDIT COLLEGE, RAGHUVANAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 062. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN DANAGERI, ADVOCATE - ABSENT) AND: M/S. HDFC BANK LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANGER, HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT HDFC BANK HOUSE, GROUND FLOOR, RASHTROTTANA BHAVAN, MUNICIPAL NO.3/1, WARD NO.77, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, OPPOSITE RBI, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. AVINASH B.C., ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010020002025 NC: 2026:KHC:37057 WP No. 611 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Though the matter called twice, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners. 2. It appears the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55