High Court Karnataka High Court

R Narayana Reddy S/O Late I Narsppa … vs Yaram Rama Reddy S/O Rama Reddy on 17 June, 2008

Karnataka High Court
R Narayana Reddy S/O Late I Narsppa … vs Yaram Rama Reddy S/O Rama Reddy on 17 June, 2008
Author: H.G.Ramesh
M.F.A.NO. 153812008

IN THE HIGH com': or KARflA'!'AKA AT nmeamna
DATED mm THE 17"! mm or JUNE 2008 
swarm   __ M _ _
THE HOIPBLE nm..ma'ncn: n.e.nA1ssL3;'+i§§z.VV   n
M.F.A. NO.1538/::2£'$ki)y8"'A::.  
BETWEEN:  

1 IR NARAYANA REDDY  
s/0 LATE i NARSPPA REDDY 
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 
R/0.1300}? N.49o5'9.__ '- § 3. ,  
LAKSH!vIl VENKATESHWARA {3fZ)I.ONYv._  *
SJRUGUPPA ROAD * '  * '

HAVAMBARL B%"'3F~LARY'      APPELLANT

(BY arm'rxraagiiuéafif;-1Y.':A:ix(.§   V' 
AND: 1     V

AGED mzsoum 4?. 'YEARS  -
AGRICULTURISI'  ' ._ "  
R/O GoPA1..A?t}RAM 0 "MP
BMLUR Pf.)S"I' _   
EELLARY 'l'&I.,UK AND pzs'rR1c'r

1 YAIQMAMTVRAr.?iANA'3!§Eabar"'s;0 _-RHQMA REDDY

;F':2Isz §$3_;0:  ..... 

 *._V2 U N M.VMAH.I§iF$HWARAPPA/RECEIVER

' 'DISTRICT~.C1'0URT COMPLEX

"BEL§_;Ak"'!"'- 583 101  RESPONDENFS

" " 5"::=sYJsR1""v..--i§)i SHEELVANT, ADV. FOR R1;

w. '  SERVED)

  'I"AHIS MFA F'iLED U/S 75(2) OF THE PROVINCML

 -1.. ibIscsLv11:1~zcY ACT, AGAINST THE 01293;! D'? 07.01.2008
 PASSED on {A No.24 IN I.c.No.:5/2003 on THE FILE 012'
 'PRINCIPAL DIS'I'RiC'I' JUDGE, BELLARY, ALLOWING 'THE

 



M.F'.A.NO.1538/2098

APPLICATION U/S 25 OF' INSOLVENCY ACT ACCORBINGLY
DISMESSING THE PETITION AS WITHDRAWN.  __

'i'H1S APPEAL cozvsmo on FOR ADMISSION, THIS

THE COURT DELXVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal by one of the of 1.

No.1 is directed against the urge; datecn. 1.2033 A

by the Court of the xffieflaxy
allowing the roofiondent
No.1 (debtor) to withdraw in
I.C.No. 15/200.131 “‘i~}o:otion 7 of the

Provincial Act’).

2. I héivo learned counsel

appearing .,tho:V and Sri V.M.Shoelva11t,

” ‘A for respondent No.1 and

‘p.o”ruVSod. order which reads as follows:

554 No.24 11/3 25 of msozuencg Act.
& their counsels absent.

H ‘ Since petitioner is not seeking to reserve
right to file petition, no need to hear
respondent on application. Hence application

allowed petition dismissed as withdrawn. ‘

‘W