High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Chandrashekaraiah vs The Managementof Bangalore on 1 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri Chandrashekaraiah vs The Managementof Bangalore on 1 February, 2010
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
 fE"1Te'- N1 e£'r'i:1gc%'f51'1Ee1i L" Of'

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANOA:,c§T2E
DATED THIS THE 19" my OF FEBRUARY_.2'C1'f3VV'.'V1-if:E  _
BEFORE ;   

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE RA'IVT.__/\/:i§"3_}-'lA!\'I.'I§"_«¢:r'..:.A'l3vD*;' E 

WRIT PETITION NO.’2v:§407/.20–O:9′

Between :

Ch-a1’1drashekar21iah V
Aged about 54 yez11′.$3_{ ‘
S/O late Lakkappa”

No.4. ht Mam faogict. T

W Cross. Na1Tj£:T11l:sfE1’Ag1’2i’ImTEi~’f- ¢_ ‘

Ch21m2’;1z’2T;pe1.T…_ _ _
I3a::1}g21l1*c-3560 OE’1’V§Ts;v_V

{ By S.B.Nitikkfll1I1a1!fi5Li? & /\fi$§C1’£’iii1{.€S }

AND:

{’53 1’13} O ETC’ E’-.v/I_c§1~s’0pO’i’it fa I1

“Pram Spori ‘C ;5:=.;qc31~;;;’H;o~x1
Ce11i1’9d ‘€>i’i’ice} — –.

.P{OEZd.

SE1aT11hi:igar”‘._

-1 I3;1t1g;e1E()r<*v'5f§O O27',

.. Petitioner

.. Respondeni,

M

1'c:gaa.1'(hl to the evic§e:"1.('e adcltzced by the pa:'t'ies on the First' i.s:s11e
1'c?g£11"(li11g the valiciity of the clotnesiie e11q1,11'I'y. eutrswerecl the

said issue in the 2-1.I'f£1'1'na1:ive by order dated 14.5.2003. H ll

3. On the plea of viet’ir11isa1ion. the pe_I’_’~*:t,i()t1’e’..i’

examined as WW4 and got nlarked 7Meio(‘*1.11a’1ei’1’t’sshisbExsL’W–l

to W77. On the behall’ 01′ the 1*esp()n(:1e,_nt-:_-lV!W¥ ll.\=t’2tsV”ex:iffaei_;1e<i_'

and 17 doeu111ents were marked .215 ..__I*2xs.lt\/it-_ 2 to I\/'?l"?.t.¢:

4. The L£lbOE.E1′ Court by tl1e’a__\va.V;”d d.£eiied_’22″Hli August
2005. allowed the ;)eti1.it)n._.:’i11 ‘pa1:’_t.. the order of

dismissal. and diFt?§§l€Cl re,Ln.:.~3_t’a.teme~tf1t.3Of the,” j3c%t.it.i<)11ca1' with

("()1'1tE1"1ui1.yV of .sil.rt’.:e.. _btltt \-\~’}”[}”l~’_)tlI. _h2–.-a(‘7l<wz:3.ges.

5. Tl1C'”€)I'{l*fi’.E” (VJVI:1.}léf’l;-ill’50t.lI’ Court. \\-‘E1S questiolied in Writ

VI-?’e1.iI.io:’;4.;jNb.833I./V2Qtl7′ C/iw. Writ Pet’1’t1’0n 310.4232/2006 both

lflbvt the xi-‘c§11§1i*1e;11’1 and the 1’esp()ndr3nt-Road ‘l’rar1ssp()1’t

. .«

C<)"1'"',".)()'1~;?%tE()11.:"'uTl1e:'vEeé11'}1(?cl Single Jtacléie by the e.()mn101h1 order

'VC'l2}.1C'd "2I*t,.__"Ja11vlt:a1'y' 2008 vide A1mexu1"e~"F'. allowed the

'WA"pet.it.iQen, fiiefcl by the Road "I':'ai'2sp<)1't Corpormion. set. aside the

':«;.u$2;'2.1fVéi'»- ..:-;?md diSI1'1iSSC(l the writ petit'.1'01'1 filed by the

:'pet.i_t.f01'1e1"/ w()1'k11:an and 1'e1r1E'tt_ec;I the ;:')1*c:3<_1ec:cli1'1g for 1*e–11e21ring

M

wi1.l1 El diI'(;?('1'i{")1'1 to t':():1sic'!c1' all 11% E"(-?1C'\«'£1I1I' dt.')('E.EI'1'1€'.i'11.§.-'A

]JI'(JdLl(.'(".d by {.110 parI.ic.s and in })d.'ia't-S an £l'i\-\-'E.'t1'C'] t1'11’c0t1.

6. On 1’ema1″td. the L2:1b0t.11′ Court having considtf’rc;f”Ci-lthgj
111£i1(:’.1’i:«;11 on 1’e.(*ord. i£’1(’11..ld1’1″1g the evidencre.
d0(‘:t111’11ent’211″y. lieicl the (*I1a11’gL*s ;.)1′(‘)vc-*.cI_wh_i_I’e dfélifiqtté’j:’.1t :1(?_tt¢pi._
the stat.eme.nt’.=; of the \k-‘i1I1&’E:SC’S
dept-:’.t1d2:tb1e and reiiablc and 1’1z’2\tii:.g.. {Q
of the ;:>§»t.1’1;ic)t1er ciiscrlosing iI1\*’O}’v’€’,I_’1v’$t:é\A”.4..:i’ i:1_V71 by
o1’d(~?1’s i11’1p()sing minor 3)1.1t*1.i.t§’1’1tj1t:t11..;§g dzxtcd 24m

Oc’1.ol;)r:r 2008. disn’1is_sed Ihitg”.at}f3[Vi’?’i(5i’J. p(*t1’t.ion.

7. ‘I’11():.igiiV_..S1′)S-..B:~Mukk*:1t11″1.appa. 1ea1’1’1ed cottrlsei
contends th’:r1t”‘the’ .:;ta.x;m-1:2::.u__;'”-<51' Mahesh placed §.)e1b1'e the

ICnqui1'y_–OI"I'iccr" ._\5=v}1eri 1;':-(1)1.cllallengcti by wz1_v 01' ('FOSS-

t'.X"¢".'t11'1I'1"1'iw-ItiofiI€'$5{£1b}ishV£§ "" 't"hc.= I1:1("'t that the ti(*}i_}.;”eissL1Cd. but wow issued with a r10t.1’ng 0:1

the 1’e\»’.e1’s€. Vs:-1.21tfi.;1g that the. p21ssc*1’1gC1’5a were e1t1t1’t.1ed 1.0 re1’1.md

v’I.(:ha11gé”V. 311′: my upitdion. (:a1’1m)t: be C0u111,em1r1(‘ted. 1 sisay so

«§j)€’.(.’;’;1Lv[$€:” ‘§’h€. st.2;1te1’1’aent 0% %\/fahc-ash 11’1e.u’kc*cc*cii1’t1gs w:’1.s not s1:bst.2n’1t.ia} IC§,_{‘d1 e=vi(“¥c1’1c*(> 01’ the

bi