Narayan Govind Naik vs Mohan Ramachandra Gaonkar on 13 October, 2008

 

BETWEEN:

1.

9
...--.m~;.-.

 TK; KUMTA

 .  1'FHIS CRLJ?' IS FILED U/8.482 CR.P.C PRAYINC} TO
'SET'

  ' tmvc, KUMTA, 0:: AN LA. FILE
  'EVIDENCE ACT nu C.C.N{).699
passm BY
KARWAR on 73,07 IN CRLRP N

THE

HANDWRJTING ON THE CHEQUES EXPQA, TO THE

  =.a§'s--13,I; Aacurr 49 YEARS
%  oC.C:~cc:N'rRAcr0R AND BUSINESS

IN THE HIGH Comm' ()9 KARNAIQIA T} 'A   '
CIRCUIT BENCH AfF"r;;£ARi§IA.§ j '    
DATED THIS THE 13TH 
THE HOPPBLE M12..;UsVf;*::€%'E:jV--%I2is~z»;1_ hfiéiaam Kimmy
CRIMINAL ':?fi*I*£T:«QVpé.  p:.§j

NARAYAN  NAIR,» if;
AGED ABQU*I'-V4~5"'{g,gRSv.AV- _
R/O BALP.':'.'.--.  1:0:-Mm3.a_;vGEiRI
    
iDIS_'F: UK,  

 PETITIONER.

(By-.%s"n'.% r:1':?3?;izSI:::¥iEa fir RAYAK, ADV.)

" RAMACHANDRA GAGNKAR

Rm F'£;DUVAN1
 RESPONDENT.

ASIDE THE ORDERS EYf’.28.12.06 PASSED BY THE
D U/S 45 OF THE INDEAN
/05, ARE) ALSO THE ORDER

SESSIQNS JUDGE U.K,
0.16/O7, AND TO {IIRECF
R THE SIGNATURE AND

THE DIST, AND

JMFC, KUMTA T0 REFE

M

HANDWRITING EXPERT AND TO GET A REPORT’l’O:PI.§’IB;}N
ABOUT THE GENUINENESS 01:’ THE SIGNATUIML, ._ : o

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION comma QN””FOR.A_f0I§DER53V

THIS DAY, ms coum’ MADE TH_E.P.Q4LL0W;1’$iG«é;V» F-
ogpmfiox

The petition filed on notified with
ofice objections oV%'[on.’j:é’jm}5~2oo3 when two
weeks fime objections was

not compfiod: 8»-8-2008, ’21~0s-

two weeks was granted.

Pefifiooo; is with the ofiice objections.
Today thefé 1;o..:’c1§i?e$éi1£atio1a. Petition stands dismissed.

Sci]-

Judge