High Court Karnataka High Court

Chinnappa Kashappa Ghatnur vs Gundava Chinnappa Chatnur on 31 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Chinnappa Kashappa Ghatnur vs Gundava Chinnappa Chatnur on 31 July, 2009
Author: H.N.Nagamohan Das

IN THE HEGH comm’ ex? KARNATAKA-f i %

CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWA}3 .:” * ” _

DATED Tms THE: 313″? B1§g’¥”‘U}7′.J}.}’.f,Y;,;. %2;}e9 Vk

B!?F’Q;RE’A:4’w._A:”–._. T A
THE H{)N’BLE MR. 5USTICE:fi.Ni NA£§2§}$kAbAs
WRIT PETmc:I§§NoM;k%éééészgééas{G1§1–(:P<§)
BETWEEN:

Sri Chinnappa’Ka$fhép;3§; G}a§;-3:13;,
Aged 60 years,._ 5. ;f_ ” ‘ «_
Que:Rtd.§<;'o"sf;A;?3o.'%a=
Main Raézd, (__Z~uledg;:Vt-d_d,a – I
fiist. Bagzigikotg % ' ». PETITICENER

(By Sri_ SR. Bé::a§ia.n1::uf;–.

1}’; “{:”3ii’%{i3;¥;%’€& Chinnappa Ghazrmr,

.3 °i§.ged::.”‘§’2j_, (Bee: Heuseheid warkg
R,?c:>..__”i’é’s::a;f’ Swasiik Talkies,
Ga1v§e’d.gudd,:, Dist. Sagalksi.

._ “Sémt. Topavva,

” ‘W/0 Chinnappa Ghantur,
Aged:49, Ocmflouseheld wark,
R50 Ward N3. KL Main Road,
Guledgudd, Qist. Bagalkfit.

;–;<,a,..

3. The ?rir1cipal,

Govt. Composite Junior

Caiiege for 80323, 9′ ..

Guledgudd, Dist. fiagalkot. – RESPONI;§EN’.fS-___ _
(By Sri S,S. Doddamani, Adv. For R1) b 4. V

THIS PETITION IS FILED Pkgxfmggfa
ORDER ON LA. NO. 3 VIBE Amwzéxumswéf DA’i’§D«i.Q4–…Q3;«wfi20{)8- : %
IN 0.3. NO. 26f06 ON TH1: FILE §C}F (3IV”I–.¥,_5 J:jDGeE(JR§ _ mm,
BADAMI, ETC. k ”

TH2Ls§kP2«:*i*iT1§§:xi% ff(“;fii1&i¥Nu{*§”” GN mg PRELIMINARY

HEAxmG’1fg1:S Dz2Y,%%1*HE-g:§’u§.E gzanfi THE FOLLQWING:

–.1; V_7E’:h.eVI§§€ti§i<:-riéi"'~aI1_d__f¢Sp0ndent 1'30' 2 and 3 are defendants and

V.VmS;§:Sfi:ie;:':v..i§i:=.;'{is–the plaintifi' befare the Tris} Cmirt. in this order

: VV fa: é<:*;1 z?jenie.A1f1tS;%:i_ fie pasrtées are referred in their swims before the Tiial

Spun. ~. "

2;= kT1:~:Aa;;;§i:::” flied as. Ne. 26:35 against the defendants far

V” …’ :c’iacI’aratio;; and injzzncztien When the matter was set dcxwgz for

;f;?’~w~

. evidence af defendants, first éefendant filed an appiic5;£i’app0i;1t2::éfit:k}f a_ Ciéurf

Commissicmer for recording the evidefzse 33f ..witi’3e_:s’se s’. “Ui2£iéi,T_the

impugned girder the Trial Cmzrt aiisizffiségfed “}A{§_’:’1′;*-.3-es. this

Petifion.

3. Piaézztiff—first rcspondcné. i$*~.re;§;e§;e3i£e(i i§i;’c:{i1gh an Advocam in
this Court. ‘1″~Ji§; defendants before the
Trial C0231.&nd””t§éy;’V«::f§V_z:§)f parties. Therefare notice
01} responiieni Ne 3 “h:}¢ii’eby”dispe:3sed.

£3’ Haard 1éaamVéd.Q::ur;é:_é§V bath the side and gzerused entire Writ

the raemfi that first fiafendatit fileé the

V _appiic;2:fi0n__”fGr«-‘appointment af 3 Caiirf Cammissicrner is examfine a

H ” K 4A44″‘2%§j.i£§€3js b3*’i*{a1ne Sri GB. Nemadég whe is aged a%u*t 73 yaars’ 1;: the

.’_jj:;1ff§<i'1vii in support of the applicatien it is stated that the wiméss had

"~ :siV1i?"fe;*eé paralysis stroke and he £3 net in a position :0 walk and he is

>\\’ ,
Writ Petition is hereb;;€_._éi}I:§m%:§§.(123:j;£ £73c*:z3;”£’§iL§-fsziéiaxzerv, ta fix Catnmissitrnef fee and is issue warrant

.. j;-v.t 9′-resoré ih é’3~cvidm1€:e csf witness §y name Sfi G,D.Nemaé£? within a

“fii1:e’fra3ii–:e,

;;,C7><!r'v"x

In View ofthe fact the matter {is pending fmm .a

direciiccn is hereby issued to the Tfiai Coggrft ta sfiii _

within a time frame afsix months: fr£)m:'€heféaté of re'c«3i'ptA of

this larder. V

bw