High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Nirmala Kala vs The Commissioner Bangalore City … on 5 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Smt Nirmala Kala vs The Commissioner Bangalore City … on 5 January, 2010
Author: B.S.Patil
1 W.F3V3?'1£*32iD9

EN THE HEGH comm' or KARNATAKA, BANGA%;€§€~?£ .V:A4
DATED was THE 95*?' DAY or: JANUARY':      *-
BEFORE  é % M    "
me HON'B§..E MR.3:.:s*§zoEf_%'§.£3.F>A*{%2£g    ''
wars' PETETKDN NO'.3§?'€~$2 <:) '!-'4'2'éGS.3 {LBgB:9jm.  ':5

$EET.WEEN:

1 Smt.NlR!V!ALA KA1.'A$  Q   1  
WIOJOSEPH ANT;HQNY;~   % L V
AGED 5393.5: 49i;YEAR§5,   % 

RIAT. :\10'33:5; DGQDANNA--NAGAR,

a_KAVAi;F3?"fRASAN-ERA, M ~
RT-.NA$AF;. ?.c3..-':sf'r;   =
BANE?-ALORE.:é--~5S8._5132*;'

2 , .,&OSEP§-;_§ Ar~.:':'=Hc';N¥;
..  AGED AB'C:.UT 49 YEARS;
" Er?JA'F- £f«JG.385{'f30t3SANNA NRGAR;

V. , _KA%:'.%LBYRA$ANQRAg RINAGAR ms:
* . agmsngcaa W 560 332.,
    Pmrgezxseaa

{gay srmscwaaa uaxmzsag Am ma
8:1!-ma «Law Assocnxssrssy

 4: ma CSMMESSEGNER,

BANGALGFZE CITY CGRPGRATEGN
¥\iR.$QiJfi«.RE, BANQRLGRE «$50 {$32.



2 W}%" .3?€624?OQ

THE Ass? EXECUTEVE ENGENEER,
K.G.HA§_L¥,SUB-DIVISEON,   .%  .;«    . %  
BANGALORE BRUHATH MAHANAQAEA i?AL,EKE;  .
BANGAL{3REi---550 £345. '   -. . " *

s. BABU,  
s/o LATE SUBRAMANY, ' . % ~ ._   
Aces ABOUT 35 .'{EARS,~--*~ _   ~ 
RIAT No.12: 15'? cR't:'.nss.: ;<;§«jvA:aaL QARDEN,
KAVAL BYRASANDRA,'W.Af€£= :xs;_tT*tiie'TTsec$c.5;i 

had eariier issued a notice unciér :3gc.321';- which £%rvasv«1¢%iva!.!e:éged by'

the third respondent by fiiing an  i:ef_fore.{he T."E'fi;'ib;;Vrf51a¥ in Appea}

No.331!20G6. in the said ‘e2f_;;.ipe_;aié.V_th£§_>gixéfitioner Smt.Ni§maia Kaia
had got herself im_p£eaded. résis;t’eci.&’§;fzéA’r’ii:i.’,:s’1* any irztesém arder.

As 3 resuit, éfio A’§:r:teVrEr.:§’-Aoréfjéi \aa}7a3 ‘;:e§sse’d in the said appeal.

Howexézég, the ‘?Q$p§>fid_§f:§._w§tfidrew the said appea¥ and iafer on
flied the ‘gérejslent ‘a’;25:}e7a’i’c.?1::é3.!;éi’:£gir:g another simiiar notice éssueé by

319 gieccnd re§§cr}§;§é}3t uvfaeier Section 321 {3} of the Act. This time the

. ” thiffi §eé”;§§;n§&€:r;t was égie is secure an Enierim ems: beéwénd the back

c}fV:h’éA[p=ev{f§’£E§;’ra~?é§5,éiiaying the proceeéings instituted at the instance af

thAe»–.4;;§etiti::a*:e %$’~:.A[ Aggrieved by the interim order of stay granted, the

‘ preserii .:s§§%it petiticn £3 ffied,

4, it is mntenéed by the Eeameé C0ur’s$e§ far the pefitierzerg

mat withaui impmaéing the petiéicners herein as party respendents

araé suppressifig the fast abeui the eariier agrpesaé flied if’? apgeat

56/

4 m:>,3?¢a2;e9

NG.33’E:’%8 the third respcenderzt has obtained an interim 9549: from

$32 Tribunal. If that is Se, the apprasriate csurse for the –4jp7’efi:§’;E’z>::'”£t.’%:js is

ta fiie neaessary appiiaation befcre the tribunai

impieaded and to seek vacatier: of the; ,E£:tg rim :__-::’:”t3’7e’;i*”,;e._:§’:;”;;r’: £’9<'«:43§'._' if 3-géfi» _

an appiicatfion is filed; the appeéiant tr§ hgna£"%m%$ §s»c§e'né;"Edé"rVih–9A §3_me

as expedétiousiy as pcssibie and'p:a§s a;§tpr.o'fp1:'¥ate

5. With these ,abservat%sn§é_;’–t§ié’::..§%/tit é§:¥etEtis3r: i$ dispcsed

of.