..... ..
1 W.F'.35958x'O9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.]'j~f*--Y_
DATED THFS THE Io" DAY OF DECEMBER S;-:--:joS:
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE IvIR..IUSTICE H.N:NAQ'AHi\A:OHAA'N-Ij'A$'V'Vi'---._
WRIT RETITTON NO: 3»:*3ST3_8/20'c').<3Y('_L_R_,gSI\,~IF:_i'I' :3
BETWEEN:
ARIF RAUF I<HAN
S/O MTRAUF KHAN SAHEB I
AGED 41 YEARS, NO"..?39 D';1"'2'.@r'\I_E\I;T,.'T...V.
HBR LAYOUT, BAE\i'G"-AI,-.ORE__
~ _ x PETITIONER
(By SrI.SYvEDTVKI--«I.AL-E'EIT_ PA;.S'H}§§'AAdY:.:,)
AND:
THE cO'IvIIvIISS~:ONE.I:T ._
BANGA%j.ORE AAAHAAIACARA RALIKE,
RESPONDENT
('S-y:VSrI'O'.NAgA'RAYIsLU NAIDU, Adv.,)
T'H;S"V.wRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 225 &
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT
THE RESPONDENT NOT TO CLOSE THE SHOP WITHOUT ANY
ORADYERABY ISSUINO A wRIT OF MANDAMUS.
O'~\.Av"'
2 W.P.35g58ftO9
THES WRIT PETETKDN COMENG ON FOR E3'REL..lI\/Ili\.ITlT5i.RaY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWii\tGT:"-."L:'--.y.
ORDER
Sri.G.Nagarajulu Naidu, iearned St’andijngi~Coun_selis
to take notice for respondent.
2. – The prayer _ in the nature of
permanent injunction Arestrainpiyngithe interfering with
the peacetui posse’ssiidr§l1.gind;:e«njoy’men_t the’pe’tiition schedule shop
by the petition premises without
due process of be granted by this Court
under Artic|IT’e.225 of the’C_onIst’i–tution”ot lndia.
E__:Lit}ertyis’vreee’rved to the petitioner to work out his
Tremedy be-.*.or’e the”‘ competent Civil Court. However, in View of the
matter, the respondent is hereby directed not
‘to inter”fere”:–Vwitri”.T the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the
H H T’ pe.tition_.sched.ule shop premises for a period of four weeks.
‘ g7\\x’\./\-
3 W.P.35958,/O9
4. S{i.G.Nagarajutu Naidu, learned Standing CQtVm’.eeIe..VEs
permitted to fife meme of appearance for respondent:v”w–itir1VVirt_’__t’1′{:it;_{
weeks from today.
dh*