W?' 1 4404 /2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED 'I'i~IIS THE 19:11 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2003
BEFORE .
THE HON'BLEMR.JUSTICE B.S.PA'I'IL_...._ 'V"
WRIT pzrrmon no.;44o4Im (G§!~t;'§:!:':CijV'_~.: 'Q
BETWEEN:
SR} VEERABHADRACHAR,
s/0 LATE D.S.FU'I'I'ASWAMACHAR, _
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, _
TALUK OFFICE ROAD,
DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL bzs'rRi'ef1f. * ' "-.,_PETI'FIO'NER
(BY MISS.R.PAVI'I'HRA FOR SR1 _R;{.M;~1§:J{JN_1§'f§a_;..my.)
AND:
1. SR} P.NAGARAJAPP_A;. ~ _ _ .
s/0 LATE D.S.PU'1"PASWAM;ACHAR,
AGED ABoUT_6e*.z_EARs,'= ' ~ I
R /OF .PRASi~!.A;%-{TH RAGAR,
BUDi(;'gERI_ ROAR, - "
DEVANAHALLI, " _
BANGALORE %RURAL---r:zs1'R__Ic'«r';
2. SMT.» --YAsH<5DA MR1A,
W/Q-E3A'.3APPACMAR,
* AGED A£30{JT 53 '
V' R/_A'r R0..«9s,*'B_.NARAYANAPURA,
~ w HiTE' R1E1_.':3 ROAD,
3RRQA1..cR?E 5 -:6. ..RESPONDENTS
3 THIS REfI_’z’rioR IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 85 227 OF’
THE (3{)NS’I’1″‘§TU’FION OF INDIA PRAYENG TO DIRECT THE TRIAL
‘COURT TO; TAKE THE EVIDENCE OF Wi’I’NESS OF ONE SR}
If.__NiIINICi~IOWDAPPA FORTHWITH WITHIN TWO WEEKS FROM THE
‘ £)A’l’EQF THE ORDER BY ALLOWING IA NOV! 0? O.S.NO.197/O7
WEECH IS PENDING IN THE TRIAL COURT FOR LONG TIME.
WP 14404 [2008
3
3. Upon hearing the learned Counsel and on perusal of the
order sheet, I find that the grievance of the petitioner is genuine.
The application filed by the petitioner seeldng permissjofiajto
examine the said Sri Municnowdapfia ¢u; ‘~4._TTo;~;o
immediately should have been considexéed on mefiis a:.:;dV ‘V
court below ought to have passed éirziozxier
4. In the above ‘order that is
required to be paswi ‘tofixosue a ciimction
to the court ‘order on IA No.6
immediate1y..*’ accordingly.
5. Copy of order over to the Counsel for the
pefifionerj’ N u _ . . .. j
Iudge