High Court Karnataka High Court

John Saldanha vs The Mangalore City Corporation on 6 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
John Saldanha vs The Mangalore City Corporation on 6 September, 2010
Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri


I.AI.-JRRGE.

1

IN um men COURT or Knmmrmm AT %

mun THIS ma am DAY or s21vrnMBr§i2%%2()L1%c:%%’

BEFORE

THE HOITBLE mm. Jusncg

WRIT PETITION No.257s2%fjm* 2om% 1L3-figs}

JOEISALDANEA
B10 LATE V
was vovmms g .

accUraa’rIo1::c;o1e% ~ R.L
‘JUGUL ~ L
JUG¥JLTO?VEIi|%*sfi!AI»L¥%KA3°!a;.L
uAnmwnET5t’,m0.2:;n.z,’-% PETIPIONER

PAI, A1:>v.,)

Alma %
.._._…c:ORI’ORATIO!§

‘ $875 003 (um

msmmzmm
% (E? %RI:A.K.VA8A1i’A’1’H, ADV. ,)

.. TI’IE”WRl’l’P’ET!TIOHI8 FILED UNDER ARTIQLE 226

_ “227 OF THE CO H OF HTDIA FRAYNG T0
‘E R%PORI}E!I’l’ HEREIN T0 EXTEHD THE

‘ FERIOD OF ‘i’IiE PETITIORER FOR ONE MORE
T WIPE ET.’ FROII 16.8.10 OR ‘PILL THE
OF HEW TIIREE PACKAGE PROJEC»’I’.
WflKEVE’R E EARLER VIBE CLAUSE {:31} OF THE

AGflElwKYAT .

TI-IE PETITION OOEIG ON FOR PRELIHINARY
HEARING!!! !3’GR(}U!”I’HI8 DAY,’1″HE COURT HADE TEE
FOLLOWEKG:

4
the. potitiarner has sought the amnion of the contract

pariod ntlannt by six month. 1′-‘urthm, the

has aka aought to know as to which

nnclzxinery *3 in be metnmod.

such a letter. the petitioner has ‘

Vii

7. Wlwthet to be

are mm the diacmflomry
]n~ovxrx:e’ fj % But having run that the

the petitioner’: nppfimtinm hr the

aims’ N ” Joontraet period.
petition is tlawefom allowed with 8.

repreueentamn, dated 11.3.2010
jj 3) £01′ the uxtuminn of tixna and depending
‘A V, on the outcome thereto. m act on the flush undea-

m’h’%finn at Ammmre-G.

R314.