Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32624 (KAR)

SMT V NAGARATHNA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/20705/2026 · 2026-08-03

E S Indiresh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010455972026 NC: 2026:KHC:40597 WP No. 20705 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.20705 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. V. NAGARATHNA C/O LATE A.N. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/AT ABLLODU VILAGE KASABA HOBLI SIDLAGHATTA TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-562105. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DILIP KUMAR I.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDANASOUDHA BENGALURU -560001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION CHIKKABALLAPURA KOLAR DISTRICT-562101. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010455972026 NC: 2026:KHC:40597 WP No. 20705 of 2026 3. THE TAHSILDAR SIDLAGHATTA TALUK SIDLAGHATTA KOLAR DISTRICT-562105. 4. SRI. A.V. NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE DODDAVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/O ABLLODU VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI SIDLAGHATTA TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-562105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30/07/2017 PASSED IN THE APPEAL NO.462/2007 BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, PRODUCED ATANNEXURE-A; AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010455972026 NC: 2026:KHC:40597 WP No. 20705 of 2026 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 30.07.2017 passed in Appeal No. 462 of 2007 on the file of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon consideration of the reasons assigned in the writ petition, this Court is of the opinion that the explanation offered by the petitioner does not constitute sufficient cause for condoning the delay of about nine years in filing the present writ petition challenging the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010455972026 NC: 2026:KHC:40597 WP No. 20705 of 2026 5. In that view of the matter, no ground is made out for interference with the impugned order in the exercise of writ jurisdiction. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17