High Court Karnataka High Court

Neena Belliappa vs Jammada A Karumbaiah on 22 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Neena Belliappa vs Jammada A Karumbaiah on 22 February, 2010
Author: Dr.K.Bhakthavatsala
€¢=mM:w wwwaw w-I=- mu-vsnamamwvuun -maw'n-'wwwg&n"wr'mmnWmw-HER niwn Mwwml -'wt'-"win.-lximmammn 'r1l%ai»!"I' uwuxi-wr fiAKNM'!'A'flM' Mi'fiEH'€fl§MM"€3W fiZe?é§.flN;&T.%.K%' Hififi fig?

I1; Tm mm; comm or KAB.3~3A'I'AIBi:$:§i;_:;=.1é§}$;.

 we J--..I€EE3€3&_ §3£LLIAFPA
 REE :ca';.;fm;3.x'v:Lzm3
% ~ L'  ' ~ Qt..1*2-I£I@F§eAI£
 'vzaéwmw TALE???
"53'*3"1"'-ii .;€390R§~
 -  Esrxwzcacm

1.3:: '2' A  m a smug c vmztrm, mva:



*ooa"vuWV'mItffiV:\'*- 'm-mun ammnmu-urmwm u"'w%.::#a"3 mwuml "Kw!" RMNNHWARA WIHH %UUK¥' 5.3%' Kflkflwflffififl Wig" fiwwm' Q?   

AWE :

3. 3&5 A Knmrzmaxm
s/o Jmmn AC1-IAPEA  
Rm Kantian: VILLAGE  
GOKIKGPPAL VIRAJPET 'I'AI:U'K
scum some  

2 Jnmmm mama
3/0 DEVAIAI-I  
RIA DEVARAFURA vILLA.«'.»§.2!"%«-- 
vmaamr TALUK H  .
scam scone    

3 JAIMABR    

gm BEVMAHJ'     _ % 
Risa  ,.  
V}IRAJFET"'TR.LU'.E;Z    
swrg ctzzoats 

4 H H am~:A.I2a1:1,% _
AGED so mms . %  
ya nE$«"AR2muRA,v£L1At;E
"'a?;RA~Ii?;'%tT: _TA:,UK   _____ .. »

5 24 25: _H8"r'}-m???.X,-."_ «
AG£I'.*=f'4i__5,    
MA B;3avag,AEUa2a.. V3§_3I:IsA€.;4E

_ vxmmgr 'ZEf.iiL'{}'K A
  %%30¥W"¢mR"fi '.

-T  " 8- 5 fl"J.;§§Is3;1~a::m. 'P13s;e1--**z:..u5

 32* 

we f mm' 'Ai'.1'Hfi;§2A

X55 : VILLAGE
v:mcr'2m" 'TIr.LUK

scum: .€§fG{"3§.G

. . . R.E8E'{3NQE}'¥TS



mm: wwmma w=ur"' m.mmmmmmmm mnwm mwwmm amt" mmmmmzmmm wmmm mwwgm wr mnnnvmxmnm smwn vmwuaw Mr' mmmwmamfin mmwrg mmmm W3" KWMNREAKM Nméfl um

{BY SR1 (3~.R.VE1~'!KATESH I'§UR.'1'I-1'2, ADVGCATE
FOR HIS PGCWRIAH 5: CG. FQR R}. E R5!

SR1 K SUNDARPs.l'£; ADV. FOR R2 5: R3}

SKI K S BE-IEEMAIAH, ADV. FOR. R4} 

THIS up FILED BAKING .T0, Qflfisfi' AN§¥3, _fimfi; 

GREEK 9T.é.4.09, yassmn 3: was civ:L 33962 zsg mg;
a JHEC, VIRAJPET ox IA.g@,6, Efi-§S[HQ.10§f05; AND
EEJECT IA.NO.é FILED BY wag 314 §;"" "

THIS wax? gmfzwifix Cfigzge GE Eéi PRELIMINARY
H£ARING- 'B' Gnofiaiéggls 'nA2;af%Hm} COURI'IHADE THE
EOLLQWIHG: " T" " """ " " w""

' rfia,gé§iéiafiapsipifiintitfs in G.$.N¢. 19922905

zjgn   Judge {S::..Bn.} Virajpet, are
 k:;;f «é.1fe :.*:';£7:_.i*$.._"'hA=:;.r'*t.£V1':'t pxaying fer quasshingf the
_¢..*:%3.'e---if dated é.4.2$(It9 paased. on I.A..I<¥'a >«

%"""'T'wf" W MWWMM «mww wamu W axnnwmammm. a-m;-m z-mum W mmmmmrm swam cmm" W mmmmm mam cm

pr-cxpased respondents, the trial ccnrt has: 

the imleading @pl:i.¢:at:§.n filed by the :es§¥3n:dvV4::”ni’4.iA M
m>.1/”de£amiant ms:-.1. Ha suhrf.:’i’:’a~. A’ tV::heC

respondent no.1 alone 31$ in pf .

schedule properties and V ‘

defendants .

3. Laaacned §§G’£§l;*3_9l 21:33.1

and 6 submits ‘illaga3.ity or

infimity in the.

4. Leaznefi-4.’ C’C}°l1I1i’3¢:A= ‘£5.53: the xrsspandent 110.4
5’E.’£b?’1§.’€1.f5 ~F~’i> “1-z<:si.:.é.«°ce was served on the

=.g;r;:p:1%:I;_c§ 't§.en before the trial canrt: and

::.§.v;33;,§ théA'.»'iiA$s,;V;:§ <;:i9i::§fé'2§£ No.4 had no knewiedge abmzt
giztgugngzfi. gsgfivaiflr. Ha furthar msnmxitts that 32
"~.:Lfi'é§ LS§5.}~%a.8?f1 [wide Itam Hmfi cf the suit
»' 'iprogertyi was purchaned fmm tha
. .,, :§§vf:i;E$$i:;ersfplaintirfs and the raaspcsnsdent z:z.4

f’-:.»:i:”§;n$d aites and fifilé few sites, and the remaining

aims are in his pesseasion and ‘aha patitianam

twwame wwwmw WM: K£\J?”ln7\iI£”fiK$”‘?lE’\J”%. mwwwm WK” WMWEVMEMMM TEIWH Vuwfieywbofifii N35″ Wflkfiififilfifififl’ 333%??? %».a%3%oJK.E Q3?’

are not entitled far any relief in ac: far

cents of land maid by them’

5.. The mm” ugneci order is noi:.__é2;_:$taif;_:ible«.

the gxaund. that no ncticif
prcposed defendants. Apart’ f1:.z3’az’tI’x.§.:%ie*~A no
material on record to I-3:OPo3ed
defendants are schedule
pxapexties. If :’§’v1:;:3.:.*:2V.’a:.1i’t: that tha
defendants ‘ f;Vé;éssfl:af$”$’i.’b%n cf the suit:
schedule will be diaptzsaed
ac-aordinglyg c:;.:71:c:11:r:£e:’f:aLn.c:as, there was
no faor» Eh’: …. .::e3pondent no.1 to file an

a.pplic7ea*:..{7¢z:TA the pzceposed defendants.

txiéfi.»””€:ak1;:f’§§’Li’j__s$?3;xed in ailawing the ircrplaaciing

the reaultg the writ: petition is all-awed
‘i:h;a iz@ugnad crder datsé 4.4.2099 passed in

i<::..;z~;.1~m. 109/2935 on the fiihs 915 Civil Judge

{$12,322.} Virajpst, is quashed… Censaquentiy, the

reapon%nV£%% T %

.. ' ….

implaading application filed by the
n¢.1Zdefendant n¢.1 ifl diamiaaad.

Prf”

mxfifififl E.§§..m f$.imd$.m§_.&$…¢,.¥§&§x 1:3 $53: .. .?_}§..,.:#.%§ sang: $.33? a..f.a¥ …?§. 4 ,, 2