Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 52971 (KAR)

SHRI BASAVARAJ S/O JAMBANNA ANGADI v. SHRI MUTTAYYA S/O GURAYYA GURUMATH ALIAS GURAYYANAVAR

CRP/100092/2023 · 2026-01-21

K Manmadha Rao

Original Suitbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:657 CRP No. 100092 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 100092 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SHRI BASAVARAJ S/O JAMBANNA ANGADI AGE. 50 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. NANDWADGI 587125, TQ. ILKAL, DIST. BAGALKOT. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. HALLAD SOUNDARYA AMARESHWAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI MUTTAYYA S/O GURAYYA GURUMATH @ GURAYYANAVAR AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. NANDWADGI, TQ. ILKAL, DIST. BAGALKOT. 2. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, GRAM PANCHAYAT OFFICE, NANDWADGI, TQ. ILKAL, DIST. BAGALKOT. 3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUK PANCHAYAT OFFICE, HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT. 4. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PANCHAYAT OFFICE, ZILLA ADALIT BHAVAN, NAVANAGAR-BAGALKOT, DIST. BAGALKOT. 5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, NAVANAGAR-BAGALKOT, DIST. BAGALKOT. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SEC. 115 OF THE CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.03.2023 PASSED IN I.A.NO.6 UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(A) AND (B) PASSED BY THE HON’BLE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUNGUND IN O.S.NO.113/2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND REJECT THE PLAINT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY & ETC. CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2026.01.22 11:26:45 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:657 CRP No. 100092 of 2023 THIS CRP COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO) 1. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 2. It appears that the petitioner has not complied with the office objection raised by the registry. 3. Since the matter is of the year 2023, on earlier occasion also the petitioner has not appeared. 4. Today also the petitioner has not appeared. 5. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non- compliance of office objections. Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE KGK, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 13