nun uuum UI’ IIAKNATAKA I-HG!-I OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF NARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA I-RGH COURT GF KARNATAKA HIGH Ce
3. 0:1 behalf of the petitioner, it is eoxxterizipeci that.
the tried Court was not justifieé in ~ ‘the
applicant to come 611 record as the
since the said person wasV”‘ncfij’ :1 733ei:1eff1_ei:_=.;r§;?”‘t>i’
United Base} Mission A. fi’:-2:51;
such, he was not a or It is
contended that it 1. “;;eee’21..helc–iV’fhe,t he cagrmot
be ixlterestegl in question. The
respondeijte “ee::1&te11tion put forth. by
the that the trial Court
was jufitiiied «ali0§#;*i:1g.tIt;e applicatian.
‘in: of the said eomtenijon urged, a
zof ‘AiI1′<:':—–erder dated 29.7.2607 would indicate
' application ' filed under Orcier 1 Rule
was taken up for consideration by the
'I-Ceurt, the learned C()'i1}f1S(i'1 appearing for the
3 x iildieated that there is no objeetien to anew the
Said application anti therefore, the trial Cour: Wfifzout
adverting to the demfls ef the order had noted the "No
Objection" and aliawed the eppiicatien and directed that
i
'1
the amerzdment ba carried out. Pursuarizt to arcler
dated 22.8.2006, the amended plain: haa%j% fi1ea
which indicaies that the plaintiff ':VV.aC§¢€}fi:ed '
position, befare the ma} *iti1;::l§é1Hci:11:a3nt~.._. '_j
allowed and thereafter {fiat
View of the mattgr, it x ofigen fezar, the
pctitioner to assai?:;..£}f1eA ibis In am;
event, €ven'.3~$su13?1i11g;.. "flrxat as corztermed
by the petitioI1 <~::,:*,§'-'i. does not
have any x1'\.IIissi0:1 C1h1,11"ch
in india '1'r{:.st,*.it E61' the petitioner to file
an appropriafié' and alga to contend
'fiiiafg §heV.':i1é;fit;§1f«:before the tria} Court. Thai:
bcéi-13g V{30.$;iEi{:1T£;"v I_ do not find any error cammitted by
the Erie} {G {:31} for interference.
Thg fireiifien 8.CCOI'(;fi§1gl"§«' stands disposed Of. No
' 2 axiim ass ii) Cos-i;t$.
:N*
. _. . … ….. -rur-nu-I I lI’\3’I”l LI!’
KARNA COURT or KARNMAKA men com: or KARNATAKA HIGH :2
Sd/-
Judge