-1-
M
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARHATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 26'" DAY OF' JUNE 2008
BEFORE
THE HOIPBLE MKJUBTICE H.G.RA.H%!'!
BETWEEN:
1 B.Vi"I"I'AL Si-IETTY
SINCE DEAD BY HIS L.I-'33.
1 A) ASHIT SHETTY
S/O B.V!'l*I'AL SHET'I'Y A
AGED ABOUT _36 YEARS
2 B) AJITH 1
Sit}
AGED A_EOUTv3<§V--YEARS _ "
3 C3. AMI'? V'
- 'ego B.sm'..r:A.L saw'?
AGED AB_0Ufl'32"f1?EARS
_£§PPELIANI" 1A]. To 10) ARE
.. f€/AT N{).'7---B, A.;AerrHA APARTMENTS
" « __ LAVELL_E"§3_OAD, BANGALORE
My "GEr§E':S11s REALTORS FVI'. LTD.
A 'meoqatzw; QENESIS ECOSPHERE
._No. 14.4,?' 221.003,
AUBRAM COMPLEX
M.''G.ROAD
.. , __E3AN'GALORE - 560 001
. REPRESENTED BY {TS
' GENERAL MANAGER
..APPsm.An'rs
(BY SR1 QPRASHANTH OF' M / S. LAWYERS INC.,
ADVOCATES.)
Ann:
1 SMT. ?.N.SI-IYLAJA
w/O K.S.lvIUR'I'HY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R;A'r M0547, 22:» A CROSS
BANASHANKARI 1! STAGE
BANGALORE -- 550 070
REPRESENTED BY HER
P.A.HOLDER
SR1 K.S.MUR'I'HY
S/O LATE K.N.SHAl\£KARAIAH T
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS A
RESIDIRO AT THE SAME ADDRESS:
AS 'THAT OF THE PI..AIN'I'I}"<'F' _ .,
2 M/s. ITTIMA PROPERTIES W1'. 'LTD,
PRO.JEc'I~. I'i'I'INA MAH.AVEER'"' -.
RO.1o54,7'raMA1N ' *
sxv BLOCK, KORAMANG-'ALA *
BANGALORE-560 034 " I '
(BY L;fs~,RERzgATA§§R1SR'NA--,VAISVOOATE FOR R-1.)
Tats MFA gs"M':+?a;;Ei: '43' RULE ur) OF CPC AGAINST
THE ORDER pATE:3,1'1-1;.2.2Oa$"'PASSED ON 1.A.ROs.1 & 3 an
O.s.RO.2o1/200.7 ON j1'fRE~.R1LE OF THE :1 ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE
_(sR.D»,;.;:f¢, BANGALORE RURAL O1s'rRIcr, BANGALORE,
AL1.Ow:RG--."r.A.'R.rO.1 FILED U/O. 39 RULES 1 Arm 2 OF' CFC
T.ivARO"O1s1AIss1RG1.A.RO.3 FILED U/0. 39 RULE 4 OF
cm FOR VAé:ATi2~.:jG"iN.3URcT1ON ORDER.
'»r;fR1sO.ARPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
4 THE COU.R1'.QELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
f'r_1_ZL&
J U Q G Q E E I
4" This appeal by defendant Nos. 1(a) to 1(0) & 2 is
directed against an interlocutory order
I 1.02.2003 passed by the trial Court - the _
II Additional Civil Judge (Sr.I)I:a.)M,H Bangaiodfi-.~.. T V Y
District, Bangalore, on I.A.Nos. VS14;iit
O.S.No.201/2007. %
2. Learned counsel for the "a;r§peIlants_ the
affidavits of '
Director of appellant Learned
counsel'; 'd_1'e'..._aPFeHants and respondent
No. 1 joi11t’1yd’su.b3′:Iiit dppeal may be disposed of
in of eifidavfis in modification of the
V. A ‘ ~ .’ ‘herein.
No. 1(a) reads as follows:
*1; ASH’;fl’ snztmr, S/o. Late Vit1tal.B.Shetty, aged
~ 36 years, r/at. No. 7-B, Aiantha
Lavelle Road, Bangalore, do hereby
~—-*eoiemnlyq1’firnzandstate on oath asfollows:
1. lam the Appellant Na1(a) in the above appeal
andlamaoquaintedwith theffl Qfthe case.
W/o
. .N 4 7
Iamcuethofizedtostueartothiswidavitort
behalfafAppellantNas.1 (b), 1(c)and2. 1
2. I state that in the event the legal ”
ultimately goes against
undertake to diemd:zz=ze/geeeaee * ‘ T
constructions/development the”
alleged disputed site/_ mjea ‘fthe
compound wall :9 H’
construaed on
3. We further undertake __fir.ot claim
* the event of the
seed dgednst us ultimately.’
The af5.davit ‘dfl of appellant No.2 reads as
fo119;dw;: 1’
51; REDDY, s/e. T Rami Reddy,
‘aged years, Managing Director of M/s.
aeneexexemmmmrmdomrebyeoemmy
4’ V state on oath asfollowss
I am the Managing Director for Appellant
Na.2inthea.boueappealandIam
aoqcxcahteduiiththefactsoffiwoase. lam
>M/
authorized to swear to tins aflidavit on
behalf of Appellant No. 2.
2.! state that in the event the legalfiw.
proceedings initiated by the Pzamtar/e1§areT*’~%eAn’
Respondent ultfinately noes .
remove any _ ”
made on the alleged e:re:\_
including the
been constructed on
made on the
area, in the event of
elem! going against us
uzzanoctezgi
A: a.E::o ci-ax: twoefiidavits are placed on record.
3. ” . “V for the appellants submits that
‘file will not put-up any si1’uctu;rc on the
631 the disposal of the suit. His
‘ …_”””sui;:mission is placed on record.
&\M/
4. At this stage, learned ootmsel for the appellarrts
and respondent No.1 submit that their clients will
cooperate with the trial Court for
of the suit and accordingly pray
mm Court to dispose of the suit A r 7 A
5. Having regard to the
the prayer made and
accordingly direct__t.he of the suit
within V’ date of
receipt]
The in tterms of the two
affidavits ialdjofiree the submission made
“for the appellants that they
dug) any oonstmetion on the suit
disposal of the suit in modification of
. . 1,. order herein.
disposed of.
Sd/-