High Court Karnataka High Court

Government Of Karnataka vs Sulthan Shareef on 9 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Government Of Karnataka vs Sulthan Shareef on 9 February, 2010
Author: Anand Byrareddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 9"' DAY OF FEBRU.-i\R.Yw ;3.()';%%t%i"j'%%?:"'-.,

BI&iF(.)RE:

THE H()N'BLE MR. HJSTICE. /~' ;NA}\E\FD. I3.YR'A.AI§f3Q.1§'f" 

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL  OF  

BETWEEN:

1.

Government of K2-a:’na1t:1_4E_<"e3«–
Chief Secretary. ' VA ;

Vi(iht1l1£tS()LI(ih;1._ ‘
B21ngalo:’e–56_0« OI) la 1

Ex.)

The DiVisiii1a2,1_!”F;5′:’e’$.E C)’f-if;-,’If’.’-\r”.t’u?’V;’ . ”
Bh2’1Cfl”L1_V’_§kIhi”.£V)’i”«”:i’Si§);1. _ V ”
Bhz1d;.’;zv’a1[léi~557_7 30 I’. _

3. The Rfiia F{)£’€S ” e
Uanba1ieb’yL!..u. V_iilayg_e,’A._ ”

S11i1.::<–3g_;-1 I)iSt}f.i§t–'5"77 CEOI. APP¥{.LLANTS

( "yVSi'nE.A::R,Siagmidamba, Acéditionai Governrmzm Plunder)

_ C su1rh:m Slv:V;1:'e'c='E';.

«. – .. ._ Age ()4 3′-1=,a>._ris.,
” :Sg):’1 t’)”§.14’x”3\E3′.Vl.I1}t”iLE Slu-::”@et’.
j1V?.;1_j£),:§§j'{<)e,1se 1\%of~')/28().
' ..AA'i'2iF5?':"T()xv|1.,
* fj V..B.haL:1-;muhj–577 30:.

5

Shimogat Disgtrict. ._

{Shri . Van’t1d.’ir;1_j. R. l”l;1vuld’.tr. Ad voetttel

v:~ -.~

This Regular Second Appeal is liieeled under”Set:”t’ioiii* E00 K”

Civil Code Procedure L-tgainst the Judgmein.firndidined’

:27.7.:2o07 passed in R.A.No.l2/20()4 oi; the-rite “ofithgzi 9re§r’1–;tjhg
Officer, Fast Track Court, Tari}»<eere, dis–n'1is~sing ot'.ht.=..:tppeatl'; and
confirming the Judgment and Decre'e..Vd:1ted: .3l'.3.2()0'4-:ip'ztss'ed in '

O.S.No.53/"I996 on the file of the Ci.xfi'i Jtidge;–(,liuz1'i()r Division),
N.R.Purz: and etc., .. _

This Appeal coming oirforw:=1€in1i.s_$iiio.ifi_'..thi'3_ day, the Court
delivered the following:– V i i'

Hea_rdt—–.t_Al"i'e-_ iGiU1.',!'-*v.*.l'I1'l1]i€'flI Advoettte appearing for the

appellztr:E.i°'._

2.; The ttppe’il.;;_t_nts were the defendants before the triztl court

Win in ‘suit for baiiei’injunction. The admitted position is that the suit

p1’opei'”t};3’w:is; grtimetl land 1-ll”lCi though there was \’it)l£iE.l{.)l1 of the

terrns of grunt in the git-tntee not having cultivated the same within

I {lie pVeri”o.d prescribed, no pi’oceedii1gs liuvirig taken for resumption

the hind and the posse.<;.§ion of the land by at third party not

5