- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010433982024 NC: 2026:KHC:39424 WP No. 20964 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 20964 OF 2024 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: S. PUVI KUMAR SON OF SH. SUKAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT R/O 197-A, CLASSIC ORCHARDS, BEHIND MEENAKSHI TEMPLE, BANNERUGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PAARAS PANDEY, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: 1. KARNATAKA BANK LTD 1ST FLOOR, FKCCI BUILDING KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORISED OFFICER 2. PAVITRA VYAS, RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL KAVI PROTEIN AND FEEDS PVT LTD, 1ST FLOOR, MANOJ ARCADE BUILDING, GURUWARPETH, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010433982024 NC: 2026:KHC:39424 WP No. 20964 of 2024 TILAKWADI, BELGAUM-590006 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SRIRANGA .S. SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. SUMANA NAGANAND, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. RAGHURAM CADAMBI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Though matter called twice, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, either personally or through video conferencing. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the petition was listed on 28.07.2026, on that day, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, for appearance of counsel for the petitioner it was ordered to be listed on 29.07.2026 and it was also made clear that if none appears for the petitioner on the next date of hearing, appropriate order will be passed. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010433982024 NC: 2026:KHC:39424 WP No. 20964 of 2024 The petition is listed today. A perusal of the petition papers would reflect that the petition is filed in 2024. Now we are in 2026. The petition is pending for almost two years. As already noted above, though matter called twice, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, either personally or through video conferencing. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Because of dismissal of the petition, interim order granted if any stands discharged and pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16