High Court Karnataka High Court

W Indiramma W/O Late Venkoba Rao vs T Imam Basha S/O T Honnur Sab on 6 June, 2008

Karnataka High Court
W Indiramma W/O Late Venkoba Rao vs T Imam Basha S/O T Honnur Sab on 6 June, 2008
Author: V.Jagannathan


LIOURT OF XARNATAKA. H16!-‘I COUEI-‘Gf_i%1$RNATAK& HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

3:: mm: mum’ 01-‘ Kamzamxa 25:1′ a5:2G;iLs§RE

mmn mm are my 0? if O ,

Tm §+3C}fi”BLE

SFg§:G4§’flAy.”..’1’V’.v.;%w–*t$:§%§’Efl%.$51.i’ gcjg

BE ER:

R,        O

miaisejzfi      .

Ras:iz:1i*n.g;:§.t 2% may = :3′ uiigrg
.}’.g-‘3:;::” ~» O ‘O …APPELLANT
:33 O O

3333:

‘:2 aagha 3,€_9 .’1′.Hcrm111r Salt),

?e€’§mi1£55}*eam,
O ,F7:’:=.s:i&»:i;1g at :1:3t%: warti,
Ja:1a§.:a».:’A«:§cTl$.i2y«;’ Sawur,
“Bfififiqs – 583319, .. RESPEDNIJENT

Hwde. Asfivj

L Y Em RS.A. is mad under swims we oftm c.p.<:.
time judgmmt and denim dated 6.11.104 pasaad
;mm.s;e4 an the me cf um cm: JudgdS1'..Dn),

Kudlig, aflcwing the ajppmi and matting aafidc the
_. -£3_;m ané ciacree flatfi 4.3.54 pas$ati in
C3LS.§aa.§2,?Q3 an the file af fix'. Civil :.Iud§s.l'r.IZ)n},
kfiuzz I

roux: OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUET KJRNATAIKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH. {IQFURT OF KARNATAKA I-R6!-S COURT OF KARNATAKA HiGH COURT

'% Rfifi. wmfixg am. far admfasisn

Cam cielismxad tha fclloswing:

fim appeilam.

C9125: fw rmwry $3′. aiéé’ of mm
in rmfit cf the said suit was
partly as d an
rmpnfiesrif: of the suit
dcefinecl :9 want tin:
af mnt. Agaixmt gm
the ma 361121, the rwponrlant

gm mm and in R,.,A.I’Ic:.aB-3’04.
sf the iawar a§peflat-3 mart aihwed

am 33%: mag the juamen: am am
V tbs ma} mart. Hmm. this apml by tbs

Efiihazvehmrdthefirfifiaumelfizartlme
partim.

34,. ‘fig suhmisafitn :::f the Eearfi Counsel for the
aypalknt is that the: apgellatae muff: ecxzrmmittad an «tor

‘/

E
L’)
O
U
I
9
I
§
3
as
§
II»
0
’52
1’3
0
U
I
‘.2
3’3
*2
5
ll:

0

E
:3
O
U
I
S?

I
§
5
4
E
8
‘E
L’)
0
U
I
9
I.’
E
E
5
§ if
a.

5»:

U
3′:

9

3′.’
§
5
3
‘E
:3

in mww am apyeal pmren-ed by the

aukiy rm am mum at? the guii;
Bmimfimn 33$ in View sf no I-gash’
mm the aim} mutt; L
mat haw rwafiad & V’t1*1v.f:..’azy§_<:}Vfi;'::;;%fi't"t:i1 thé ' L'

qwmfian 9:5

Cszzxumak ffif the quesfwn of
fightijg, :1;§§% mm {mm 1219:: auit being
mush as, thnugh tlm zmfice

wag 13:2' gfimi by the appellant in the: year

was ma fix the ymr am anawing afiaer
azafi t21m*¢f$r¢ the: leaner amwtc court

akwsed the apfil préerred by 1%

":1:s4;;e< 'néi§¢z1t and 35%. aaéde thus juéwtmt cf the maul'

§uEn%.§n=31§g}fioftE1aa&1wa.§.d51zbmiaa§nam madefl
have gmm thraugh tha fiudgmnw fif bath the cnurta:
wlm m$t}'marvatwnfac'mm,wfichgoagai13atthe

3%

E
:3
O
u
z
9
1′.

5
5
4

E
ll»:

0

‘E
8
u
I

9.
1:

E
3
§
lulu
O
E
3
G
u
3:

Q
1:

§
I-

E
ll.

0

‘E
:1
O
U
:1:
‘.2
I
.3
§ \\

:2
O
U
3:

9

3′:

3

I-

E
IL
0
E
:3
O

ayméant. 621:: E the fmcling -sf the ma: €LT<:j:£t:t:?£5«b.V:1::':;;1t

thare gg mt: mama miafiannship zaexwm;

was mt quamfinsaé by {ha aggmfiant

mm”: has aka eemrredj Vb tlfié ‘view. _”%§a1t@ this’?

trzfi mmrt ?.hatthegt.1@l1&n,_
1am}:3:’d~t¢1′:a:et and thc

factor is that 0%’

the 55.35:

1:: 1% fia’u,Bt,A’;:1:V3″%uch plea was mm: befcre the

flmufi? dam mt prevent: the appemte

the suit mean it is feund that tim wit ‘w

%’1’fiA 4% plain &.dJ”.z1g af Suact1a’ I1 3 of firm

_L?n;tn.i..:a:é.§m:’: Ads, 1955 makes mfm pmition clear. section
V. gides that “away 52.1% ixstihxted, afil
” – am an appiimtim made aftxer the: prescribed

a1’l:&ngh Emimtion has not

bfififl mi, 1.2? as 3 defencefi

againat the aafi

%OURT OF KARNATAKA HiGH COME?’ K§RNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H!GH COURT OF KARNATAKA H36!-I COURT

3, Tim kawer appvefiata mart baa

the abam }’.’fi’1:3’§f}:.S«3′.(311 af 333: and the suit ”

has ham ma ts: be mm by E:i;e:a:i’£’:::.?.ir;:xi=%,’,H ”

1’15: mark: in 2′.%ia. apfil, Ham; it «. O’

3:1. ;_ hdge