Sri.S.R.Jayashankar vs Sri.Baldev Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4842 Kant

                              1



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                         BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

         CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.262/2013

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI S.R.JAYASHANKAR
    S/O LATE SRI G.RAJAGOPAL
    AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

2 . SMT. GIRIJA SHANKAR
    W/O SRI S.R.JAYASHANKAR
    AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

   BOTH WERE EARLIER R/AT NO.202
   ADARSH WEST, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS
   SARAKKI MAIN ROAD, J.P.NAGAR
   BANGALORE-560 028.,

   CURRENTLY R/AT FLAT NO.104-P
   ETHER APARTMENT
   NO.10, SARAKKI MAIN ROAD
   J.P.NAGAR, I PHASE
   BANGALORE-560 078.
                                           ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI S SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE)

AND

SRI.BALDEV SINGH
S/O SRI TIRATH SINGH
MAJOR IN AGE
R/AT 6/1, 1ST CROSS
                                 2



II MAIN, SUDHAMNAGAR
BANGALORE-560 027.
                                                   RESPONDENT

(BY SRI M V MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE)


     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO            SET ASIDE THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT       DATED     27.02.2013      PASSED   BY   THE
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (F.T.C-XI), BANGALORE IN
CRL.A.NO.861/2009     AT   ANNEXURE-A     IN   DISMISSING    THE
APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN AND ETC.


     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:



                           ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioners again seeks time to

take steps against the deceased respondent and this Court

already made it clear vide order dated 02.03.2022 that even

after lapse of eleven months, the counsel for the petitioners has

not taken steps against the respondent and also not pursuing

the matter and adjourned the matter on 15.03.2022 and if steps

are not taken before 15.03.2022, the petition will be dismissed

for not taking steps to the respondent.

2. Hence, I do not find any ground to adjourn the

matter again to take steps against the respondent. Accordingly,

the revision petition is dismissed for not taking steps to the

respondent.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SN