High Court Karnataka High Court

V S Kashyap vs Karnataka State Financial … on 17 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
V S Kashyap vs Karnataka State Financial … on 17 August, 2009
Author: V.Jagannathan


i
EN THE; HEGH CGURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALGRE

Dated: This the 177″ day of August 2069
BEFORE

‘THE HC}N’BLE MR.JUS’I”§CE V.JAGANN&T}§’}iN” .

M.F.A.N+::’.5452/2005 {(3901 M [ ” ~’ ‘
Bi31’i’W’EEN: A T

V S KASHYAP
Sm P SHAMRAG
HINDU MAJOR _
NO 355, 16″” Mi§.IN;._33″*’ CRQSS
4&2 ‘1’1″:3LO{3K, JA’i’Ai¥3A{§AEi.b”v ” j ‘
BANGALORE 41 V

– AV

(By 313 $22.3, wrisiav’, ADV.

M] :3 Poovmfyg :3; »;:Q,=.._ _
‘V’i}i<R.–'XE~r'i 8:. Ami i:A1;?~gjAN, smvs.)

AND:

2 3 Kz’s3€NA’i’Ai<.'_A S'l'A'T'E FiN'ANCiAL. €f)€3RP(}RA'}"IGN
rm 1';A1,'§'HI3vfiviAIAH RQAD

– , C(}.{‘é’§?f}§§MENT RAILWAY SFATZGN
T “V _ Esixmaasgsgfi.-as
, §€”Ei¢~.B¥’.j’:}”$ MANAGENG 1:aIREC:T:;}R

2 A$s£’-;.<;-rm»4T GENERAL MANAGER { 3532:5933
..r.«:.s«:_wc: N9 1, THEMMAEAH ROAD
.. NEAR <::aN*r0N:'vmN'r STATION
" BANGALORE 52
= RESPQNQENTTS

% .535: an S G PA§~&I;")F.}", ADV. FOR <::,*m-:2)

Em}

M,F'.A PELED U/S 43(.1)(r) cm' CPC A(}AiNS'I' *1'.-HE

ORDER UT. 235.95 mssan cm :A.m.;.;,_j-..;N.._
€_).S.NO.3i364/01 on 'r1~a§; FILE 0? THE XXV§'E'~–A§} [§'i;I;
(31%? crm. JUDGE, BANC}AL(.)RE}, iyzsmiasim' IA;z§{:»u.i:- H
FILEZD um :39 RULES 1 an :2 R[F}.!~ .:-i~i,4aIe.i)1S3’§§?53.v ‘FH}S.’

}.)A’¥’. ‘£”i:~£}3: <::<;m 13;' :);:::.;vEREx_§'-Li–,§§vsz;:§z.=G

J U
Perused the ‘ V¢tiui§$;;$Osa1 of 1:116

appeal. H¢:z331″€i;:3’1<'f:3_#?3:::"fIV"}:;'a':3Cii ;_(§{){}1f.iSfiI f%)i1"""d1e I'ESpO1'1d€3I1'i.

;Sf;ate f§:3'inéi;*2§ie C:0}f"p:)i'at:i£3n. None appearta

for tg 'I ~ . VV V " V".

‘ $i1¥2s:Q{iissi{:.:1 of the respond.ez11:’s courage} is

fiiéi: 1:A “‘§§:i:i%arj;}JTj:;”‘:9éa.2034/we dated 8.’?’.:2009, whiia

a1i<§v«,ri;':g.'L§ie appiicatisia fer ixzxpieadmexzi of the

k V, ap§,:2§§c:#i1t, the Apsx CGEHT 3139 p€:3'§12;iE'é:e¢:i rim

Stats i<'it1a:"1(:{–: {;ii{i 3 flesh

V’ wfiubiic a¥JCL’i01′} of the subject matt¢::r {sf £216: 6ispL:;t¢.

Q /

in View of tht: afaresaid order passed bgi1_1€

Apex Qomrg the appeal tilemfmrzz-, does not .,

considemtian. The appeal is accardinglfz ‘= ‘

as havirxg became infructuous.

Dvr: