N. UMAPATHI v. RECOVERY OFFICER (RULE
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
this writ petition is dismissed as it has become infructuous
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 12587 OF 2024 (CS-RES) …PETITIONER BETWEEN: N. UMAPATHI AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O. LATE N. NANJUNDAIAH, VEERABHADRESHWARA NILAYA, IX CROSS, OPP. TUDA PARK, BADDIHALLI BADAVNE, TUMAKURU - 572 104. (BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY M., ADVOCATE) AND:
RECOVERY OFFICER (RULE 441) AND ASST. REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES NO. 68, I FLOOR, BETWEEN 17TH AND 18TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALOORU - 560 055.
SRI. UDAYARAVI SOUHARDA PATTINA SAHAKARA NIYAMITA UDARAVI BHAVANA, 7TH CROSS, I MAIN, K.R. EXTENSION, TIPTUR - 572 201. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. [REG. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY] Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. M. SRINIVAS KUMAR, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENTS) …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:29360 WP No. 12587 of 2024 HC-KAR POSSESSION NOTICE NO.KA.RA.SOU.SAM.SA.NI/SA.SAM.SA.NI/ VaAa/382/2023-24 DATED 25.03.2024 (ANNEXURE-C) ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition, as it has become infructous.
Operative part
2. The memo is taken on record. In view of the memo, this writ petition is dismissed as it has become infructuous. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: this writ petition is dismissed as it has become infructuous
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227.
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.