IBM “T13 HEW ?.’.””ih”””1″ GF fl”:’v’.iv4′-“-.’:”.r’-‘u.r”‘u’-‘u RT EF\?v”G3’1{aG?LE” .
,_,# A.._ …__- T ……. ..
DAT D
PRE3ENT
was HUH’BLE Mk.JusT1cE g.R}t33nuuaa%$H 1}’
THE Hum’BLE HR.JU3f1CE_filfl;¢EHfiGQEHhAHG0Wnh
w.A.Na. 13s2’U%52¢Q1 j ;
BETWEEN:
5:1 Hanohar 5.¢D§aai;’«A
fife. GiriWRa9TDeséi,”p
Aged abaut_52}yqars,,’yV _
RE31DfiHT.UF Kinnai_Taluk;*
Kmppal Di3trict-_’§v “. *” HAEPELLANT
cfiy 3:iuB.R:’3fiaiieh$r$? Advocate?
»&;NVh;.i _ ~-“.y …..
“”¥Ifufi;nTTmé*whnagar,
campu-
1;_”T§fi”Eég@é@ai Transport Authority,
AEnppa1’nivisian, Koppal,
Ey its Secretary.
‘Sari aama Investments Lt ,
‘»chikkavaarayyanavar complex,
V} Hufili a 5E5 029. mRE5PflHDEflm”
Thia Writ Agpaal is filed under Sactian 4 af
the Karnataka High Cnurt Act praying to set aside
the nmflar passad in the Writ Petitian Na.2147 of
Zflfifi dated fl9.08.20DE.
‘1-“h’!’L’I LTPI4 +~’ ‘hrn=’1£,,Iu::’T r~rul’I”{‘r|-rt :1″ Fan UvI.n.’|~i!n41-tu-HID
5 LEJ-I-9 ‘”~hIJ-W’ I’h.l’b”‘i.!”>J- ‘\-i’Vd”I|-Li-I.I’!fl NW1} n|-o\fnL-
Haaarinrg this day, Barmurtnath, J . .. dalivared the
.::-;.,,1 1_,,,..’……_….,
.J..*a..i..l..-LAJII “L118 u “”‘
“I” aarwn in ..’.’=’Ih ‘inn’r* inafu rim} var n~.’ “TIE rlsauu an
n’ tl-lid-InIn|’ duh Wflil CI-II-Il’h’uJn’|I’nIbIIIIHnN”V “w!MaJ v* ‘V fi’I WLKMJHW till’
4r-.14’… M-.._¥ -urn-c~’:+~ 2…-…-…,.1 .=…..-…. 1” is 1′ .-.4: ‘3r”H’1″1 r’….’
.L.J..J…!..l3 mm.» ‘Fl’.l..J.’u fih-‘|3:’YF-€5l..I.n Lnm:…«’a’, :.u “s.:. v.1. £nU’.- I 4:: x
In the aa’:i.:i “j;–apfi11;:a§’t:.;::§’4~I%,5.M07, the
cause fm:* the ptglay that the
that a%t:zm;~éea1eht.. ‘ ;’=”.=;s me.» cause much less
sm£’.t’:iu::Lant “maize 1157-,3i”.~~–:&Wr1 t=:a condone the delay.
tiim ;.,.:h315’zF’fllw§l.]. “VC£’J.1J.E’}5*3r case sh-zauld have been
V.’-dismiwwd”wiiiziizznut condanatiar; azxf delay.
appellant is mtally negligent in
V’-V___.’ .§xr=;i1%si5:-tzaiting the case thmugheut. The appellant
task-9:32 .a vehicle on hypothecation from
H.¢.=.s§mrr:dar4t N-ma-Finance Carpcrratiorz and as there
was: fsailmrea to pay .installzm;mt3 agreed to, tha
C’ ,4′)
6″”
‘ ; 3 :
uv.nx’I-.4″ H1 .5 .0-Ia,-Jnecs §-on bun Q|:gI: 1-my-I Inna. l’Im-un;’a-unlan–.l- ll… 1′)
‘o”W£.|.ul.’u.~.J..’i’u ‘1.-“JHLLLG ha’-J LJE DVJu|.’.«U’-4% I93′ 5.”\’UZ7_k.”v’LLWalUlI.Lr IVU
Fifiancg fiarpmration and tharaaftar, the¥’,***
r%$pwnfl&nt aggliafi far Vtha fresh licen$§L”E;fh§i% A
fiama was granted by the 1P” Rmggpndent¥Au£h¢ffi£y,
Aggriavfifi by the same, the impfign§fi HEitE§éti££efi’;
:~ara.21.«:r.r Inf 2905 is ri1eu.»T’n;;tiné;.V_”th-g
wwan thnugh the ardar af ggéflfi pf frfififi ligands
in favour of the ‘%é3gafifi%fifi _$fi;2 wfiéVEdated
*”-:-L02»-..:.:«c:;3 and -:h.–;». in tha
year Emma, thg’l§$:nefi $i$§lafl$fidg§iaismissed the
writ getitifin ¢h_fifié gffiufifiafifufieiay and laches.
Q.® IDt¥fifl$J%%gé%&F it i5 contended by tha
laarnam fimufiael §bfi £fiéEé@§ellant that though the
fiflflalganti h;fi» §nfirufitE$: the case Pafiers at the
1 Héa£;ié§tf:t& a Aééfifisel, due to illness and
V5$h$%gu§fifi; fifi§th af the counsel, the writ
gatizimn Eéfigd not be fiiled in tim”. In thg w it
ufi uvyy vf tnfi fiffifix imfiugnefi GT
“i.§fi9hE0fi3, the appellant entrusted yapers ta one
uksri M.E. Rajanna, Advncata. But, later he came
ta knww that the writ petition was nat filed and
the mwunsel was no more. This explanatinn ia
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIInu-un—nuIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
xa aéfie GE mcnth w’enf’£h§”.
agyellant teak the certified copy” of thému§E&§fi{a ‘
imgugned, entrustment of th§m”paperé””£§ %fi¢
cmunaal, etc. are net fwrthcnfi;ng”fii£figfi i$°fihg’;
Mamaranfium uf writ Petitian pr in Hgmcgfinfififl §f
writ Appeal. It is alas ncf éfiatgd $5 #6 ofi what
data, the apgallant afi§roa§g%fl fh% nffic%Aaf the
laarnafl cmunsal $51. N5$; 3éj$fin§g’ E%gh if for a
mqment, the agp§$iant%sga%Se i#5a¢§§fited that he
2»:
antruflted fihejV.%§ér3″fifiv,fihé,*?ear 2003, his
nag1iganuém”in7;kaEging» quiet “far thxae yaars is
fl@@£fmfi;} ‘ae’ He n,a5’an¢t caraa ta gee what
. “_: ‘_. ‘…’ JL. _………..1 _..:..2-.._.. -1:-.g– .=:__ -2-
h’.§””Q43u”.’:%a’3 tn? ‘fu..S ».’Eia_:4.’,_ 3’i”i’1a r..;1.um.1.L.:a L..L’IJIfl l:1J.J.H L
-the3w«@apEsta ha3_p§wn cnnsifiered by the learned
‘V$ingl& Jufige in_pr¢per perapective.
Q5} _He fi1md no merit in tha wzit ngtitian
‘Pnégiigant attitufia mf tha appellant continues in
this appaal alsa, in as much aw this appeal is
alga .filad with inordinate delay mi 316 days.
(5-Aw
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
JL!
Hancfi, wa finfi aflsalut%l”‘ mm marl: either Ia:
canfimnatimn af daisy ax fur considering the §Edér’;
af tha laarnad Eingla Judge. Hence, If§;i afTf,
2057 seeking for condonati9nWb_of “de1§y *Via
rajeched. Conaequently, the appgay fiéiis aha fihg”¢
aame ia rejacted.
Fl
53
SIS