Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. M. Vijethra, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash a registered auction sale deed dated 21.01.2019 executed by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), the first respondent, in favour of the second respondent, Sri. Venkataramanegowda. The petitioner claimed title over a property measuring East to West: on Northern side 28 feet, on Southern side 33 feet and North to South: on Eastern side 103 feet and on Western side 93 feet, carved out of Sy. No.179/4 of Keathamaranahalli village under a gift deed dated 21.11.2017 executed by one Smt. M. Varunadevi. The petitioner alleged that the auction sale and sale deed pertained to a non-existing property and sought its quashing. However, on the date of hearing, the petitioner's counsel was absent, and the court noted that the petition had been filed in 2020 but no interim order had been granted. The court observed that the matter did not require any further consideration and dismissed the petition for non-prosecution. The judgment was delivered through video conference on 3rd July 2020 by Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Certiorari - Non-Prosecution - Petitioner sought quashing of registered auction sale deed executed by BDA in favour of second respondent - Petitioner remained absent on the date of hearing despite notice - Court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution as no urgency was shown and petitioner failed to appear (Para 3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition challenging a registered auction sale deed executed by BDA should be entertained when the petitioner fails to appear and prosecute the matter.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Law Points
- Writ of certiorari
- Non-prosecution
- Dismissal for default
- Lack of urgency
