High Court Karnataka High Court

Vasant Narayan Naik vs Ramachandra Timmanna Mahale on 11 April, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Vasant Narayan Naik vs Ramachandra Timmanna Mahale on 11 April, 2008
Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy


COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT’ KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUI

IN mm HIGH cczuzrr or KARLIATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED TI-HS me: 11″ may or 593:1. 2ooag~~–.I;f[_’:I’CO,’

332933

TI-E I-i0N’BLE HR. avssrzcs

ammml. nzvxsxoxw 93112193 2§*t;_I’i;’491!2.I:3–:2:fI:%%I’
BEWEW _ . V_

VHEHNT HHKRIRN NPLIK .’

as rungs, ace CGNTRACTOR”‘I-*

ago Hfiflfiflififili, s:nnABuaHWj,V__u C,

vwrana KAHHADA DI5?RICT3″ =, %»;__+ ,+
3″ :-~ II i~* “_.;;EETITIGNER

tax 531 SAflEELI§.fi§fifiiN;I§§?;lV ‘9’

V r7 I ___ _ _ I__

nmqacmwmwn
35 YEARS, me “‘£>D’S.I1’¢ES5I»._ I

was sx-1IvP=II:a.i,I %t:L.a;*-:1
JGIEA: DIS’I'”.’=

. . .3?.ESPD1~IDEN’I’

_gg;r 312.1 in ADV.)

zigmfiay IS 211.22: HIS. as’: :1; am. sac 401

:;a..§;c “ztmrmrrzo TO 531′ ASIDE mm GREEK or

Arm smrmzcz DT23.€38.20G6 9335323 33.’
~.V.:_”‘.ffa3$”~«<:x*£§IL JIIDGE {JILBN} 5 .m2r:., DANDELI, mama
D"£S'1'E3"..C'I m C.C.I*J0.$9{}r'20£)2 Arm THE arm ms
Jj::.=.c:m?:tm-mp BY THSE 03.17123 13?. 1110.200? PASSEH BY
" mam, mm snssxorrs JUDGE, WTARA KAHNADA,
*'x.§.aim. IN' CR.L.AFPEAL.N?3.1BOf2Q05.

1/

'.I.'§-{IS £".L'R,II{INAL REVISION PETITIGH COMING
ADIIISSIQN THIS DAY, TIE COURT HEDE THE

DEER.

Pet it ions: and his can-unsel pzesent R_§a3i.¢,n§iei1t 2

ans: his ccunsel present. A jC3i1’fi2.OA:’1f£}.ii::’.L-‘A3A’._1OintOm§’rm:)

“The .raapandent’4″1ii;;s v”‘;:f2f.i.f.r::te
compiaim: mg_’&.£_nstS.-V”:;21-E:-;i” for
the affeggfié of
31.1″ .Ac:£: , Kara:-ax
.D2’3£:ri~a.’:–f:,-. ‘ifzhmz, after
the ‘hie Magistrate
c:c:zav.z:§’t9& far the said
¢>ff;a::Vca=,O4″‘£nV_é;>::s9a’=_ ééhtanae to undergo

V _ 51,3335};g_:’.£r;:pr;i”so:;xne2:t far 51:: manths and
H”-.:mg§¢m;aE _st§:u_ .1 fine at 1,000/—- and

27′; £’:’.2¥;§’,>,.-‘A’.Vv ., O .’jI:.a:r” respcmden t as

*a«::am#-.n_:;’i3.atV.i::’:-r2:–,. me petitionar being

;u.._»__aiggrieva¢i’g_b,jr $3725 said order preferred
‘”;i,a%i2:i::te.Z appaal before Biatrict and

“E53-fiicgi Judge, Earawar, and amid

diamlaaed by upholding aim

3 Egrcier passed by the Hon”2:>1$

mgxstrate.

COURT OF KARNATAXA I-EGH COUR’filA’OVl:’ KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H!GH COUR

/’

21/

It is submitted that, being __
aggrieved by order passed say both G
cczazrc beluw the petitioner
pwefbrrad abova revision petition5H I@’faO

is submitted that, pezisiqner has p§i&j_O

flhe entire :2-ampanaatian cc”A,r6:§932r§nti8fl’t-F”

new the reapandant dag: no£,fiamt,&fiyOH
claim against the peciéiéfisr. ‘I¢’v£e§O’
at the sattiemenfiz ngd§:¥héE3eent”mhaH
both paxties v”vEdar §;fi&$$§dH In
a.C.59flf20&2flpassgd_§y fii¢:£”$a&gé’and
RFC, 3and9l;{*afi¢ sfibsééfiénfigf order
at menfxxhégifin pagggd fly District and
3easiqn_’&§#§gf_ 3m%§a:;H in Criminai
Agpeél J§Gf3Q§§_E#f ha set aaide and
the,p§ti3ibn%£m#iyO§a acquitted in the

interea£¢¢fvjfigti¢eQ”

‘1 zfija in! §i§wH at the abava, this criminal

§G;evia£efiH§$fii€iefi[ia allawed in terma of the joint

Vmem¢Vfi1§é B§’fiha parties. The judgment passed in

¢;fi}s§:599x2oo2 on the file 9f GREG, Dandeli, and

GGt§£-fififi§m§nt of tha Appellate fleurt in Crl.A.No.

GRH»;BG22éO6 contixming the said ardar are hexaby set

.Hx§siae. Conaaquently, the petitioner-accused is

COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT’ KARNATAKA HIGH COUR? OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUi

€/

n.,
0
.1
t
c
9
S V
r .. *
s1 g
h
3
i
n
n
P
4

9
c
h
9
_x
f
c
e
h .

t t

c
f
n. A.

d I
6 H
t
t E

M

m. a

8
a 3 ..n
km 1,.” P

5500 10…. <x<»<2uS. ".0 EDOU 10:… $.<»<zu5_ ",0 .5300 10.1 S_<.Ezx§ ".0 ._.xDOU 16.1 <x<»<zm<x .mQ.__..xDOU 102.. $_<»<2~_<x ".0 .350"