RAVIKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(-1.) 1. The following order was passed on 14.12.2011 by the learned Single Judge:

(-1.) 2. The order should have been in a greater detail. Be that as it may, on 13.04.2010, it had been ordered that if steps are not taken for the service on respondents, the writ petition itself would be deemed to have been dismissed as against respondent No.3. On 16.06.2010, the application filed to recall order dated 13.04.2010 was dismissed for default. Thereafter an application was filed for restoration of the petition and it appears that on 21.07.2011, 08.08.2011, 08.09.2011, 14.09.2011 as well as on 19.11.2011, the application was adjourned on the request of learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner. A perusal of the impugned order dated 14.09.2011 makes it amply clear that there was no appearance on behalf of the applicant and hence, the impugned order was passed. Learned counsel for appellant states that the presence of counsel on that day is not borne out anywhere in the appeal.

(-1.) 3. We find no merit in the appeal, which is dismissed.