' «.1, V-'L§is&*§'.I§o1>DAsi'a'13:a"ivtMA N " 3. SR! SRINIVASA IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA AT BANGAs;,(§:éfr;'%V: DATES THIS THE 265" DAY cm FEBRUAE:€fVY'§ij:fT)C¥V« * BEFORE 4' " 4' THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTEE 1'€%§Ar:§A&Nr?:A T'*:.. WRIT PETITION N01 19V:2 '1-...C>F" zdovmmécm) RF," ! 'W FIFIN: 1. SR: HANUMAI~FI'HARAYA.PPA S/OANJANAMPPA _ AGED AE;c:~u*1°e;.L:s,v12ALYA s:;Uw'R.'if:BLI ».fIUM.K'».IR'j'£JIE§"§' SRi SHIVAKUMAR' .. , T310 ANJANAPPA " V mm wow 33 was ' = -RA/AT THIGAIARAPALYA 'E GULUR I-IOBLI ' ANAPANAHALLI MAJARE TUMKUR 1:)1s'1* S] O ANJANAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YRS R A'? THiGAL&RAPALYA G LU?-? HOBLI Ee.a'med_V emnieel for respondents. I have been taken
either?L–._p:zt;(:haeed the suit schedule properly under
sale deed dated 21.4.1932 plaintiff has; not
ll stated source ef funds for acquisition of suit schedule
The plaintiff had made an application for
tempnrary injunction. The learned trial ~
cnneideration nf facts and circllmetarleeeh “‘
regard to relationship between if
plainfifi has failed to pI’iIt1:§._l”:’a»!;ie eStalrli$l2._ I”;’rl1._:$i’iiv~w».«.-ijait
schedule properly is” nf
Plaintiff. 1 t
3. appellate court
accepted__ the order made
by the l defendant is before this .
,,.-{l’.’Vie*h:ave learned emmsel for petitioner and
Z the plaintfxpatt lrom stating that the plxaintifi’
prepefly. The plaintiff does not have independent
source of inczeme. She had not got any sthreedhana