SRI SAMIULLA SHARIFF v. SRI MOHAMMED MUSTAF
Court: High Court of Karnataka
Bench: TARA VITASTA GANJU
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Karnataka judgment dated 2026-02-04. SRI SAMIULLA SHARIFF v. SRI MOHAMMED MUSTAF. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
- 1 - WP No. 46887 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU TH DATED THIS THE 4 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 46887 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. SAMIULLA SHARIFF S/O MOHAMMED RASOOL, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO 411-627, KRISHNA RICE MILLS, CHAMARAJA DOUBLE ROAD, MYSORE-570 004. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RUPESH KUMAR. , ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. SRI. MOHAMMED MUSTAF S/O LATE N. ABDUL KAREEM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO. 2852, MON THABOOTH GALLI, SAJJAD STREET, MANDI MOHALLA, MYSORE-570 021. 2. SRI. ZAFRULLA SHARIFF S/O MOHAMMED RASOOL, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO 411-627, KRISHNA RICE MILLS CHAMARAJA DOUBLE ROAD, MYSORE-570 004. - 2 - WP No. 46887 of 2018 3. SRI. B. K. GANESH S/O KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT DEEPANAGAR, SOUTH PARK BOGADI, MYSORE-500 019. 4. SRI. SYED ASEEM AHMED S/O SYED AHMED, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO 7/1, NEW NO 14, MASJID STREET CROSS, NEELASANDRA, BANGALORE-560 047.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NISARA SAB. , ADVOCATE FOR R4; SRI. Y. K. NARAYANA SHARMA. , ADVOCATE FOR R3; V/O DTD: 15. 03. 2022-PETITION AGAINST R2 STANDS DISMISSED SRI. V. R. BALARAJ. , ADVOCATE FOR R1(A&B)) *** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE HON'BLE I ADDL. 1ST CIVIL JUDGE (JR. DN) AT MYSORE IN EX. NO. 284/1997 DTD 27. 04. 2017 AND THE ORDER DTD 24. 08. 2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MYSORE, IN M. A. NO. 62/2017 VIDE ANNX-F & H RESPECTIVELY. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - WP No. 46887 of 2018 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL ORDER 1. None appears for the petitioner, despite the matter being called out twice. On the last date of hearing also, an adjournment request was made on behalf of the petitioner and the Court had directed that no further adjournment would be granted.
It seems clear that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this case. 2. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed in default and for non-prosecution. All pending applications stand Digitally signed by closed. TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE BMV* List No. : 2 Sl No. : 7
Source: High Court of Karnataka. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.