Shri Kamalappa H Jalihal vs. The Union Of INDIA

WP/105918/2023HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC02002488202318 September 2024Bench: JYOTI MULIMANI3 pages

For Petitioner: SRI. KAMATH AND KAMATH., SRI. S.G.SOLARAGOPPA., ADVOCATES [ABSENT]

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, Shri Kamalappa.H.Jalihal, a sole proprietor, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. The petition was listed for dismissal due to non-compliance with office objections. On a previous date, the petitioner was granted two weeks to comply, failing which the matter was to be listed for dismissal. Despite this, the office objections remained uncomplied with, and the petitioner was absent when the case was called. The Court noted that the petitioner had not respected the court order and appeared uninterested in prosecuting the petition.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was liable to be dismissed for two reasons. Firstly, the petitioner was not represented when the case was called, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the matter, thus constituting non-prosecution. Secondly, despite being granted a specific period to comply with office objections, the petitioner failed to do so, demonstrating non-compliance with the Court's order. The Court observed that the petitioner had not respected the court order. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed on both grounds of non-prosecution and non-compliance with office objections.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution? (Question of fact) 2. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-compliance with office objections? (Question of fact) Arguments: Petitioner: The judgment does not record any arguments made by the petitioner. The petitioner was absent when the case was called. Revenue/State: The judgment does not record any arguments made by the respondents.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13245 WP No. 105918 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 105918 OF 2023 (T-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI. KAMALAPPA.H.JALIHAL, SOLE PROPRIETOR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, REGISTERED OFFICE AT. SY NO.126/3, HULAGERI VILLAGE, KUSHTIGI TALUK, DIST: KOPPAL. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KAMATH AND KAMATH., SRI. S.G.SOLARAGOPPA., ADVOCATES [ABSENT]) AND: 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE REVENUE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, HAVING HIS OFFICE AT 128-A, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 2. THE DESIGNATED COMMITTEE, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, BENGALURU SOUTH, C.R. BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER. 3. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), NO.71, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI-590 001. 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13245 WP No. 105918 of 2023 3RD FLOOR, RAJAPUR SKIES, COLLEGE ROAD, HOSPET DIVISION, HOSAPETE-583 201. 5. OFFICE OF THE ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE, ”SHRI LAXMI COMPLEX”, 2ND, 3RD AND 5TH FLOOR, APMC ROAD, 1ST CROSS, SADASHIVANAGAR, BELAGAVI-590 019. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

When the case is called, the petitioner is not represented. When the case is listed and is called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case.

As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the petition was listed on 04.09.2024, on that day, finally two weeks time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which, the office was directed to list this matter under the caption ‘for dismissal of petition for non-compliance of office objections’ on 18.09.2024. NC: 2024:KHC-D:13245 WP No. 105918 of 2023

The petition is listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Despite granting time, the office objections are not complied. The petitioner has not respected the Court order. As already noted above, when the case is called, the petitioner is not represented. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution and also for non-compliance of office objections. (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 13

Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.