Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3781 Kant
Judgement Date : 5 March, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.477/2021
BETWEEN:
1. M/S. ARYAN HOME TECH PVT. LTD.,
OFFICE AT NO.617, 15TH CROSS,
100 FEET RING ROAD,
JP NAGAR 6TH PHASE,
BENGALURU-560078,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI BHARATH SARAKKI GOVINDAREDDY.
2. SRI BHARATH SARAKKI GOVINDAREDDY,
SON OF SRI T. GOVINDAREDDY,
MANAGING DIRECTOR OF
M/S ARYAN HOME TECH PVT. LTD.,
NO.617, 15TH CROSS,
100 FEET RING ROAD,
JP NAGAR 6TH PHASE,
BENGALURU-560 078.
AND ALSO AT NO.68, 36TH MAIN,
19TH CROSS, JP NAGAR 6TH PHASE,
BENGALURU - 560 078.
3. SMT. RASHMI,
W/O BHARATH SARAKKI GOVINDAREDDY,
DIRECTOR OF M/S ARYAN HOME TECH PVT LTD.,
NO.617, 15TH CROSS, 100 FEET RING ROAD,
JP NAGAR 6TH PHASE,
BENGALURU-560078.
AND ALSO AT NO.68, 36TH MAIN,
19TH CROSS, JP NAGAR 6TH PHASE,
BENGALURU - 560 078.
2
AND ALSO AT
C/O SRI K.N. SURENDRA REDDY,
NO.109, 17TH 'C' MAIN, 5TH CROSS,
5TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU - 560 095. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAMAKRISHNA GOWDA S.N., ADVOCATE - ABSENT )
AND:
SMT. G. SAILAJA,
WIFE OF SRI C.L.N.REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.226,
B2, GHATAPRABHA,
N.G.V. KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU-560 047. ... RESPONDENT
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 397 READ WITH 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT OR ORDER DATED 27.12.2019 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED LII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
BENGALURU IN CRL. APPEAL NO.1157/2018 IN CONFIRMING THE
JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE DATED 20.06.2018 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED XIX ACMM AT BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.16335/2017 AND
ACQUIT THE PETITIONER IN THE ABOVE CASE.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This Court vide order dated 23.10.2021 ordered to issue
notice to the respondent, but process fee and copies were not
furnished. Hence, the matter was again listed on 12.11.2021
and at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, one
week's time was granted to furnish the process fee and copy of
the petition. Inspite of sufficient time was granted, process fee
and copy of the petition are not furnished and today there is no
representation on behalf of the petitioner.
2. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-furnishing of
process fee and copies.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MD
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!