High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri K Chikkegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 28 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri K Chikkegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 28 March, 2008
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
"g.~.::_: 

at-ou....;u.i -u-.u.a«,-u.-nu . o 4-1.-u-on ~r;-,u.-Q-aunt-ma-I.l'I-9;. II-Ij'I.II'IJTi"'I

um EC!" RT 1-' 1u1x<n51nn..=.~.fiT .I:m.uum..uRE

mmxn ms THE mam DAY or MARCH 2003 

BEFORE

'THE HoN=13L.E ma. JUSTICE AJIT J Guwni,         L

u.ru.a-~n-"r~ nus:--1~'rrr-rnn hr- AER rug! orviiarI.5i'E:*,_t:!I::§¢'mf"r:!1 .  '

BEIWE-EH :

Sri K..C:1*fl1d:¢gow&a,
Sm Kakagwda,
Aged about ESE! yemwm,
1"".l I- 1-.=-.._....-..,_. n.1r..,..1.:I...., Ir'... .. .. .. --
H; u .ru1.¢jJp::.,, 11u.u.u.uI.u. Amun,  -

Mandya Difit:1'i(:t..

%    
 

.I'_"I'fi

Jill):

I ~ 'Hm Sfiate cff  .. _ H
I-"C32.-:=g+1.'wx3a:1V:'a;t.';t'_.rr:*.-'1' by 
Rmmnua  "  "

IW: '|"$..-fi'|'l.'I".._..... A. 'V 
.i'-3-1..D1.-LI.HiHI~.fl,* V ' ' '.
Bmaiahw

V _ . amrda,
  M:émd;y'aV_'DifitV-T:; Mandya.

   3,.   r of I.-and Records,

 'Disét., Iuiandya.

'  I~*'51*i_.Ratnuja1en'iahrna, Sins Kalegowcla,

 aizuaut 52 years,
R)' 134' Plugupa, Maddur Taluk.

"  ;u;1andya mm-1.2:. ...RESPC)NDEHTS

AA » fjfiri c+m1an»urasneamra1an, Arm for R1 to R3)



        of mu

 "'u'Ir'.'P in filed under  '£26  227' of 
C.n::nstflt11ticn11 of India praying to direct the M to fix the
baurnciary -mi' flaw pcstit.io11err and R2 as per petition doécl
%@ '."é!?i3'.utf;l|E!L.1'.9"Z""? by  Lhe .rm'!,-er af 
dateci u;I}r2.fl:E£.2flD3 made in Appeal No.26!  3
finn:;m1n:'ea-E tr: ti:11=:."I?uI"ri't"1"-'4':-.a?:i't;io1'1.  K  A

'hfllifl W.P r::nmJ.rJg' on for pz:e1uw% X'    %  k

1-Amy' 1'-1v'u-.1 Irma-:1-v-1' 'l"I"|l3l*fl 'l"1'-nu  I .
 Lul..«I.'I.: 1-n«I4'R~l'l-sI».I.I~  -u |Io-I--Ila-I J-Tn'-hI&A'l'Vl-L-la! I  V

Pnwsfitmmaahaalcar. leaarnom-d    for
delatimm of Respondent    ofi zficord.

Raapzmcflcnt N-r.s-.”r is, _ deletfiad V ‘b ~

AGA is directad
m mm mggicg 1 ta 3.

“t_:L_n1;;a:- is 1; :1;-are was a

pg

.L’I_ ._

x V Kappa village, Kappa
1’fiobl;i,’.”f:-1a.iifiuf.VTaIuk. Lvlandya Ilzistrkzt. It is the case of

gmfifififiilar tflhat the second respondent directed the

Z3!-h-lulv-I J~’&9’IP

-.+. 4″+’~=.’.I¥-‘-?=-=}«,~a:z:-.,.r.*..;-.2-aw to m 1.219; Lemfieum 92’ tm 19.21-r’i.a at

H ‘tim1ar an wceil a his, br::at.t1er” %, pursuant in 1:113 said

partitisrm dmd dated 22..O8m199’.«”. The gt-ietvanec of the w

1’9:/;

—fl”? ‘

_ :;r2=«3Eg:;:3l:=:::..=:«..

pe=t:ifj.«:me1’ fin izhat the orciar paaaaci by

I’EHj[JI:il.”fII’iE1’11; is not being given efiisct to. Harms this writ?

patitiaaaxx far a. dhmstion to the third ”

irnplam-mt. the ordezr of the asecumi ‘ L” %

4%.. mmnously such a di1’ectio1}i«A{:£§f_tm-V:>t

iI1EE1′.’uU.¢}’.l as; thixae Court act”‘fi.;l! ‘Q1

M»-$1.-i..l.*L» Lfl ti’:-.3 srfiar $1′ re-gsg:-::na~1e£’s.t..¢.2.

to make

E?

iuu1.uuuaut
implemam. ” a’-2111 tion is given,
the m2«c:mi;y:1 ponsiduar the same, having

regarcl mo at Anraexure-B dated

diapused of

M1j.t’3é,Vi3ii.§§xndraaInekaraiah, leamea AGA is

I ma file mm of a within four weeks.

“9

£4

“-m.

1