ENE THE HIGH CCIURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALGRE. \31.P.No.i 259 OF 2008 I %N we HIGH count or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED 'mm mm 141% my 01? NOVEMBER, asroae L ma HCNBLE MR. JUSTFCE N.K.PAIiL_j n BETWEEN: 1 SMT GOWRAMMA B S WK) SR! SRiNW'ASAN AGED ABOUT 57 2 SR£SRiNlVASANBV ' SID LATE sag VENKATARAMfaN'r% .$E'¥:TY 3-A . V' ~ _ AIASEYEARS -- _ 5 ' ._ BOTH ARE a.~@::f?:4ea I V _ _ PANcHARATHr.;o..»i'N:LAw:A. " 4TH cRc.ss»vaoL.imrs.RM._w'ENssota: V . Kou.EeALA,~57144u--. . _ _ _ _ Psrmowsas (By 3:: : aamm M L, I AND: %% ' ' " _ 1 ,, ._i3Am:er= zM"nw§:OLLs§3ALA aszmca _ ~ ..... 14 RE?' BY_3T$__MANAGER _2" , " 'e..c\:i&i:<, c:::*="§n:a.f::'g " mueaumzmn BRANCH . 'muesiwxam no 112,MARGOSA ROAD BETWEEN mm ANB 11TH caress :3 B No 345 BANGALOE-3 REP BY rrs MANAGER ' " 3 = :€:H!EF MANAGER & AUHOSBSED omega BANK OF INDLA MALLESWARAM BRANCH NO 'HZMARGOSA ROAD BETWEEN 10TH AND 11TH CROSS vmrr PETITION 110.1359 oI--*%2oM% 1%%~GH,g:;iR'rA IN THE 3436}? CFEPPERT £5)? 1%-A~RNAT~Pc§%r% -AT 'r"'MNL'~'rzRf.F)R'E W'P'Nn'.1359 (3? 'zflfifi RE THE HIGH COURT 0F KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P'.No.l 259 OF' 2008 2 P 8 NO 345 MALLESVVARAM BANGALORE3 RESPONDENTS-«._'»_T ~
{By Sri : F VANS ALI , ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 AND R3 ~ SERVED)
ffii
mswarr Pemeou is FILED unmk Aarnctaszfia ‘And-22:’ ( 1:’
THE CONSTITUTION or INBIA PRAYNG T0 Quasn ‘:1-as ..lMPU<?-NED'-.
ORDER BT. 18.122697 PA$ED BY THE DRT INAPPEAL NO.5J2C<56 'UN§)E'§-'2
SECTION 17 0:'-' 'ms smmesz ACT, AT ANNEX.A;v. (AT PAGE NQ;2§VTo_.32).%
AND TO QUASH THE ORQER M3529 'is; NTERIM APPucAT1ou NUMBER
1315:2037 DT. 26,11,200? WEE ANNEBLB. (AT PAGE N<).~33_ To' 34).
THIS wan PETETION cbmuo «€351 Fer; ?§1ELIM:NARY HEARING {N
'3' eaoup, mas DAY, THE scam" ;.u..oe;,j_ra:E mmgnm;
hé$.fe– sought for quashing
the .183′ December 2007 passed
by the in Appeal No.5I2006
SARFAESI Act, at Annexure A,
j_(ét’;23ge_,f%£r3s-. g’§*8_to 32) and to quash the order passed in
intaf’i’m gfifiiéfiiaficn number 131512007 dated 26″‘
v-.N°Vem§:§f 2007 Vida An exure B (at page no.33 to 34)-
/
W 33%? ‘Y-“fififi (‘f€}I’fRT F}? 1€”31\”RN”ATA’1€”fii ‘A’? ‘FffiNC?”#ST.{‘}’RE W'”.P’.N£3fi”i?’§3} 0′? ENE
2. Learned counsel appearing fer petitimers has
fiied a memo dated 7″‘ November 2008, in the
on 12″‘ November 2008, stating that, flue
respondent — Bank have “‘ 2
per the communicefionlletter datecfi zif
issued by the Controiling Ame “3a’f1k
and the copy of the eke aiang
with the memo. Furtheifi memo that,
one of the cov1@§fiéee_- is Ishali withdraw
the above fespendem in terms of
the sanefion’ September 2008 hearing
Reference V”‘N4e.K.ZtO(fAi§’B£;’\}A;Pl080 issued by the State
éSli§:1v*£.,….!-fiempegowda Road, Bangalore-9.
‘-,Theifeft:ar’e.: ‘irflfiew of the said ccmpromise, petitioners
the writ petition may be disposed of as
2:»: me 1410,34 €f{?)¥»}R’-I’ 03:’ KARN§§’%’AlrE-A M” ems:c–*.e+.€>m: \3i’3>.?”~¥e’.”3’3:’S”§i 5)? am
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE WP.No.l2S§ OF 2998
4
3. The statements made in the memo dated 7″‘
Novarnbar filed in that registry an 12″‘ November
stated supra, is placed on record.
4. in fine Sight of the aforesaid.4ma§§fi¢}” V
petition filed by petitioners is
the risk of learned counsel f%§f”~w.petffioner3A.V
accordingly.
” EN $1431; 3
1:311 €C)LH%TC1FK.AJéNfiLTAKAATBANGALC3R£W.P,NmJ25i) cm gem: