RAHIMAN PATEL AND ORS vs STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS — WA/200285/2024

Case under Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 Section 4. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 08th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: KAHC030102302024

Filing Number

WA/200261/2024

Filing Date

07-Nov-2024

Registration No

WA/200285/2024

Registration Date

26-Nov-2024

Judge

R.devdas , Brungesh M

Coram

R.devdas , Brungesh M

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

WA ( 145 )

Sub-Category

ELE-Election ( 195 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

08-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 Section 4

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAHIMAN PATEL AND ORS

    Adv. SUDARSHAN M

  2. 2.SUDHAKAR DIGGAVI

  3. 3.SHREEDHAR DESHPANDE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS

  2. 2.THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION,

  3. 3.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

  4. 4.THE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,

  5. 5.SHARADA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-Jun-2026

    R.devdas,brungesh MView PDF

    The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the writ appeal filed by three TMC councillors from Kembhavi challenging a single judge's interim order dated 02.09.2024. The court found the appeal had become infructuous due to subsequent developments, as stated in counsel's memo, and accordingly dismissed it without addressing the substantive merits of the electoral dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Dec-2024

    Hearing - Interlocutory Appln

    R.devdas , G Basavaraja

  4. 27-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 07-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. WA/200285/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the writ appeal filed by three TMC councillors from Kembhavi challenging a single judge's interim order dated 02.09.2024. The court found the appeal had become infructuous due to subsequent developments, as stated in counsel's memo, and accordingly dismissed it without addressing the substantive merits of the electoral dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case