SMT. REKHAMMA v. THE COMMISIONER
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Writ petition is disposed of as
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. 14 r. 5
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. Memo is taken on record. Writ petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER AV
Judgment
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI & SMT. SHILPA RANI, MEMBER W.P.no.337/2023 (GM-CPC) (Lok Adalat No. 2717/2025) BETWEEN: SMT. REKHAMMA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O EREGOWDA, R/A NEAR CHAMUNDESWARI TEMPLE, SUBHASHANAGAR, HEBBAL, MYSURU DISTRICT. (BY SRI B.S. NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: THE COMMISIONER, MYSURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, J.L.B. ROAD, MYSURU - 570 005. (BY SRI SACHIN V.R., ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER …RESPONDENT 2 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED
02.11.2022 PASSED IN I.A.NO.VIII FILED BY THE PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF, UNDER ORDER 14 RULE 5 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, IN O.S.NO.725/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AT MYSURU. THE TRUE COPY SUBMITTED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED: CONCILIATION ORDER Sri V.R.Sachin, learned counsel for respondent has filed memo along with copy of judgment dated 29.08.2024 passed O.S.no.725/2019 stating that writ petition has been rendered infructuous.
Operative part
Memo is taken on record. Writ petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER AV
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Writ petition is disposed of as
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. 14 r. 5.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.