High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Appeal Against Interim Order as Writ Petition Dismissed — Appeal Renders Infructuous. Writ appeal against interim order does not survive when main writ petition is dismissed.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 75
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Sri H.S. Mohan Reddy, filed a writ appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act against an interim order dated 24.06.2020 passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P. No.2710/2020. The appeal was heard and reserved for judgment. However, during the pendency of the appeal, the main writ petition itself was dismissed. Consequently, the Division Bench held that the appeal against the interim order would not survive for consideration. The court accordingly dismissed the writ appeal as having become infructuous. The judgment is brief, with no detailed discussion of facts or legal issues beyond the procedural consequence.

Headnote

A) Writ Law - Interim Order - Survival of Appeal - Dismissal of Main Petition - Writ appeal against interim order becomes infructuous when the main writ petition is dismissed - Held that the appeal does not survive for consideration (Para 1).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a writ appeal against an interim order survives when the main writ petition has been dismissed

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ appeal is dismissed as it does not survive for consideration due to the dismissal of the main writ petition.

Law Points

  • Writ appeal against interim order becomes infructuous upon dismissal of main writ petition
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (KAR) (04) 34

Writ Appeal No.416/2020 (CS-EL/M)

2022-04-19

S. Sunil Dutt Yadav, N.S. Sanjay Gowda

Shri Jayakumar S. Patil, Sr. Adv. for Shri Devi Prasad Shetty and Shri Girish J., Advs. for appellant; Shri Prof. Ravi Varma Kumar, Sr. Adv. for Shri P. Anand and Shri Manjunath Reddy N., Advs. for C/R5 and R5 and also for Shri K.S. Kalleskappa Adv. for R6, Shri R. Subramanya, AAG for Shri G.V. Shashikumar, AGA for R1 to R4

Sri. H.S. Mohan Reddy

The State of Karnataka, Department of Co-operation, The Additional Registrar of Co-operative Societies, The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, The Assistant Registrar of Cooperative, Hirenagavalli Vevasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha, Kolar Chikkabalapura District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd, Special Officer appointed for Hirenagavalli Vevasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ appeal against an interim order passed in a writ petition

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the interim order dated 24.06.2020 passed in W.P. No.2710/2020

Filing Reason

Appeal against interim order

Previous Decisions

Interim order dated 24.06.2020 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. No.2710/2020

Issues

Whether the writ appeal against an interim order survives when the main writ petition is dismissed

Ratio Decidendi

A writ appeal against an interim order becomes infructuous and does not survive for consideration when the main writ petition is dismissed.

Judgment Excerpts

Since the writ appeal has been preferred against an interim order passed in W.P. No.2710/2020, this Writ Appeal would not survive for consideration by virtue of the dismissal of the writ petition itself. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed.

Procedural History

The appellant filed W.P. No.2710/2020 before the High Court of Karnataka. An interim order was passed on 24.06.2020. The appellant filed Writ Appeal No.416/2020 against that interim order. The appeal was heard and reserved for judgment. Subsequently, the main writ petition was dismissed. The appeal was then dismissed as infructuous.

Acts & Sections

  • Karnataka High Court Act: Section 4
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Grievous Hurt Case — No Interference Warranted as Trial Court's Findings Are Plausible and Not Perverse. Appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) Cr.P.C. fails as prosecution evidence d...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Quashing of CIDCO's Lease Cancellation in Tender Dispute. The court held that CIDCO's cancellation was unjustified as the partnership firm's bid was initially accepted, changes were authorized, and no concrete breac...