W P NO..'25510[.'2009
2
KOLLEGAL TALUK, C ANAGAR
DISTRICT, PIN 571313
7 SR1 NANJUNDASWAMY
S /0 GURUSWAMY
AGED ABOUT 3 1 YEARS
CHANNALINGANAHALLI
VILLAGE, KO LLEGAL TALUK.
CHAMRAJANAGAR DISTRICT
PIN 5713 13
8 SR1 KUMAR S/O GURUSWAMY ..
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, I
CHANNALINGANAHALLI
VILLAGE, KOLLEGAL TALUK, _
OHAMARAJANAOAR DISTRICT ._
PIN 571313 RESPON-D._ENTs f;
(Sri.H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD. Hi'L'GP, 'FORR-- 1" R"-5;
THIS WRIT PE_'lY§'_I_ON ISPILEID IIND'ER 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION II\IDIA DIRECT THE R1 TO R5 TO
TAKE APP{{O3I5Rh*.Ti%IJ;AC;f§O1\¥ I'N.§3IVINO}_"PROTEc'I'1ON To THE PROPERTY.
LIFE AND TO RIGHTS PE'I*I<IIONER TO ENJOY THE PROPERTY AT
SY.NO.24, 319,22/A, 27'/' 328/B AT CI-IANNALINGANAHALLI,
OHAMARAJANAGAR. DIST. BY sP'R,3CiTECTING THE WATER STREAM AS IT IS
WHICH ;RUN_s IN THE MII)DLE OF THE PETI'I'IONER'S LAND AND E'DC..
" PETITI33(3:)33I\'I' COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
"--.THIS'I3AY, COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
arendra Prasad, Iearned High Court
“”{T3;:over1a1rnei1t Pieader is directed to take notice for Respondent
{O 5.
Copies to be served.
W P NO.25510(2009
3
2. Even though the matter is listed for preliminary
hearing. with consent, it is taken up for final disposals
3. The petitioner claims that there is a
Survey No.23 of ChannalinganahalliJfillage’;H V’
Chamarajanagar District. Since
form a road in the said streai3l:.\”ih€ It-$(‘i’lii/t:iUl?e1′
O.S.No.94/2003 on the iiie Ciiril’–:.}iidge (Jr.Dn.},
Kollegal, for a declarafionand c’e.nseqi.iential reliefs. The
said suit was dismissed’ the petitioner
preferred a said appeal was
allowed and the the learned Trial Judge
was set:’:__asi_de the petitioner is decreed and
Respondents l6»to 8- or” on their behalf are restrained
V frompéforming track in the water stream situated in
the northern side of ‘A’ schedule property and
As’oi,1tt_iei4n-t’:’s«i.de ‘B’ to ‘D’ schedule properties by way of
_ perpetual” kiiunction. The said judgment and decree was
Vlqiiestioried in Regular Second Appeal before this Court in RSA
a.’N.e;29e7/2007. This Court has dismissed the appeal and has
_co.nfirIned the judgment and decree of the lower appellate
Judge. #1 A?
,1′
W P NO.25510[2009
4
4. The present writ petition is filed so as to virtually
enforce the judgment and decree passed by the Civ1’1__.Court.
Apparently, if there is violation of the decree, it is open
for the petitioner to file execution proceeding_s’.:–.
learned counsel for the petitioner; .submit_sMthat’;v.eXecution””
proceedings are ‘initiated. When the p’etit’ione_r”xh’as it aiready
exercised his right to execute “the decree, the ‘sq’-u.esHtion oft’
entertaining this writ petition does”-not.._arise§ ‘~«Neediess to say
that the Government rna”c1’iinery «required to adhere to
the judgment and d_ecree_p_.t. V
Petition of it
Prasad, learned High Court
Government;t’Ieader for Respondent Nos.1 to 5 is
permitted to tile “merno of appearance within four weeks. ~ 1,
, ….. .-A»
Sd/E’
JUDGE
.JL