High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri K S Ramesh S/O. Sri Chikkarase … vs Sri Srikante Gowda on 3 December, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri K S Ramesh S/O. Sri Chikkarase … vs Sri Srikante Gowda on 3 December, 2009
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 3"' DAY OF DECEMBER 2009
BEFORE

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J.GUNJf\'f;4'_»V.': 

WRIT PETITION NO. 12933/2OO9[(}l\/i'%7I:'eri_}:':  A

BETVVEEN :

Sri.K.S.Ramesh,  
Son of Sri.Chikkarase Gowda, 
Aged about 42 years,

Resident, of Kanchanahallj

Vfilage, Sosaie H0b.Ij';_'. ._
T.NarasipurTaIi:,1k,f"  . ' 2
Mysore District.  V" .  A'  ;
Represented by aG.P_;.A.HQIdVe1' "
Sri.K.C.5'athish.f5.  I "
Aged about 38  j A  
Son of Sri;-Chikkareise:~G'C1w&:i'a.~"
No.577, 2m "C_rOsSs  A V " 
Maharashtra Beecii, 

_ xv VNazaer.aiQad',~ Mysore.-5:70' .0 10. ...PETITIONER

»  -{By.,S1'iM.H:§CShivaramu, Adv.)

 l,_ S1"i.Sri§§21:1i,e Gowda,

' MVaj0r,"S'on of Sinake Gowda,

A f_" ReS:i~der3_t of Bevinahalii village,

  if A

'Sosaile Hobli, 'i'.Naras1'pur Taluk,
Mysore District.

. The Bramch Manager,
State Bank of India,



to

Sanna Kaigarika Shakhe,
Yadavagiri, Mysore.

3. The Assistant General Manager,
State Bank of India,
91-" Main, 3"? Cross,
Saraswathipuram,  u _._ 
Mysore.   

[By Sri.B.Roopesha, Adv. for   _4
Sri.Deepak, Adv. for R2  R3) A L '

This writ petition is filed'--v..u'nder Article '226 lloftlhe
Constitution of India with a prayer to Cguash the sale
notice dated Nil issuedrhy  3 inresvpect of
item No.2 at Annexui-"-e_ pfars'uan"1:.i_to the paper
notification dated 05.04.2009'publis_hied..in--.Hindu Daily
Newspaper at Ann;eXureA.7F7.._:'V.  as  1*

for orders, this day,
the Court madle'  follciying:_ j

,_ThetA.petitioner is questioning the auction notice

 published in Hindu Daily Newspaper

 fine-§4'0_"respolndent, who auctioned the vacant site

'shearing. 10.0077 situated in Sy.No.85 of Alanahalli

 livillalgey, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore. The said site was sold to

 petitioner by the 1*' respondent. pursuant. to a sale

dated 07.03.2005 for a sum of Rs.2,34,000/-.

/

j

respondent. the question of keeping the petition alive

does not arise.

Placing the said memo for disposal

petition stands disposed of.

Since the dispute inter se betwejexl. :t11’e. p2’11V*’Lies :has:, A’

come to an end, necessary t1t_1_e~.g1eedA’are t0A».re.t_uVrnedA

to the petitioner ~ purchaser. __ w
smg;s”F\jUDGE

SPS