High Court Karnataka High Court

G N Krishna vs Sri Huchabyrappa on 16 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
G N Krishna vs Sri Huchabyrappa on 16 September, 2008
Author: B.S.Patil


: wwunu vi nnniunamnn ruwn uM’Mfi.fi«}5Jr mfiflflfllflflfl i”IIl.?!1 QUUKI UP KAKWAYAKA KIQH CQURT Q?

as THE HIGH mm or-‘ rcmnawmm, f f _
mama ‘I’£-HS TI-E 152% my :35’ % k

BEFORE

‘rpm I-IC}Ii”BL}.?, mt.

G..H.II!IA. %
~
A.GE:4′?YEAR;?_s 1:: 4 *
12,15. IR}. 193.1,. ” ‘ ”

IzmmE,;’G1m¢»g<§AR1";V' %
a.amz.c:_RE%.-~35 V _ % % rmrrmman

[BY 3m,n.L;.z-.§Qn;3:E=j1rs9:=i,

% 5j€§_V§.ATE'_£}f1!§G:P1BlUNI¥APPA

2:.

g Wf0fiIE?

5933333
V °2%§.’
‘ Sfifi HUC
‘ …££G’E: 30YEILR.8

4. mgmmmm

Si £7} EUO
AGE: BIBYEARS

fig Rfiffififilflfifi [C€}%’I’ RAE
I3 §A

M ‘bu-IwIF\JHI\ta \ufl%

“”m*mMN’- *1”-m Mvufw «gar rs.mmzmAas.A mm-1 L’UUKl’ Oi’ KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 0F KARNAVAKA H!$H COURT OF KARNATAKA I-EJGH COU

135% HUC A
Ami: 30=¥EARs

5.. Pnmrxrrmmm
mm m
mm: 24-111513.323

RESPOKDEHI’ 2 mm}: WIFE
ARE» Rmmmmmama
ARE CHH.};>REN()F
HHC A
ALLARERJO I * =
mmaE,D V V
Hcwm, amitrmwnz N~:}12:m,1fAL§1K ‘ –

?. mmmmtaapm    "   
aw  %
mm: aamms  %%%%   V'
Rm xmme, :7,  1   _ 
I-HG fi{3..£'&',fl'C£}i»{3I§Y'f"-., *      '
H smug,  %  
BJ&.1$wsLORE-~560i??9    2  

3,. s.V.E§AGEAVE§§DRA V
sm:s.E~.v.s&5ET’:¥ A. “””
AGE::3.’?YE&RE _
RIA ze*cs’;m.3T_4~’z. – ”
=3:-Ia <:c:L«k.'.."4;z~I¥',_ E3T§§fiE~

sea 07% msyoiwnsnws

(a{mé;'éé;'% ,V ma cg R-1 AHDR2 to R6

—3§§3_fi§éE..Ti$§”_R? as msrzxeann wrrm

at

pmaon is filed mm Articlm 226 &
4:3′? Comafitufinn prayfi he ‘lane a writ in the

éftzuertiaa-at-iqua.5@theoz-dm-pasuedby tm
Pr}. {Saran-ici. Judge, Bamalcre Rural Dish-int, Ba@lore
daneé 1.’:’s.?’.fi8 in M.£’..Ho.18!O8 Vick: Annexure-F and
em.

2 uwunn wr nnnzvnamnm nawm mvua!.,.a,=_Mr WRIKNMHMIKA. I1″!!! 5..-LJUKI U?’ RAKNKIAKR NW5″ CQUK? OF KAXNAVAKA Higfl COURT 9? %&RNA3’AKA

153% petition mum’ on for prchm’ ma’

this day, thecourt mania theflc:

lg: this writ pe’a’tx>n,’ V.

ardm gem Ismzms passed
amazon Rural ngiszoa.

By the saié c:rdar,.?1;e allowed
the appeal to 5 ham,
aatm; 9:1. Civil -Judge:
gs:-, mg; mm, Bangalore on
2:r.m.=2oo:? rejecmg IA Noa.1 and 2

1 and 2 of the Code of cm

appallam ccurt has set as-“tie tm

% Q by the am court houim that the said
fiowid that the tdal eourt acted uzndm a nmmm
n4¥3ctim:.:zwh?3eaetfingnaiie the ozdmpassed by the trial

mumamimmmmmgfimmauwforfiuh

6

,. ..,…mm W nu-uuvrlu-u\.H nrwfl uvuJ1§.:«§;.Jr RAKNIMRKA 1-mm comm 0? KARNATAKA HIGH COUR?’ OF KARNMZAKA HIGH COURT OF KA§2NA’§’AKA Ham; ccm

eemiéfiatian by mndozning the delay of

3., Learned oaumel for .

the agammh named by the mm in
mmamrm the delay of
and “ma ::r>rztim1ir1g ‘.*3:1 e an the
diapoml as 35%

4%.. _ appm1’1q’ for
the part1’m§ mé ed the etdara passed :5:

court has 1-ggmxy found that

L the gum by the trialcnurtwaa cryptic and ms
order. It is in this bac1®’ou.nd that the
[4 mmnaea for am: msamam of the

of the mpecave partiw with a daemon to
a. mnaiderad order. Although burned oauxmel fiar

the psfinoner mnamds that sumciem cause was not
5haw:1%rrt3:1e:iehgta&’10Sdayab$?u1’ethe1:Jwm’

%/

‘I uwuna war” axnmmmramrun remvn !..flJU![..l _\ )!” EEAKNAIAISA filial’! hUUKI U1″ KAKNRJAKA HHEH {;C3UKT OF KARNAYAKA. HIQH COURT 0% KAKNATAKQ H56″ CQU

appefiane cmzrt for oonamzng the delay, a :1
order games} by the lawn-sr appenam j
apinian as tlm cxnxzrt hem; A

jusfim beashurfical a
prammc View efthe to be mm.

3″ W 1%” °f the Iowa-

aypeflate in flu
‘$333! counsel for the

the matter, the court

that the 3::-anhed earlier

saaazifis 531 the applicafiornn LA Real and 2
Egg da;§:i?.%g:’fi1:_b:V1,;Vt11e 1:-ial caurt. This direction, as rightly

LA r thc mm amuse: far thc peamonm-, is
by any wing mm resanims’ the
facfia cam: mafia out by the plafi to enabk:

t§1m’i:aaec111-aa113r5u’chi11mri1n::rder. Tfiright
mumfiartbagflahaoanntweatodirectbothflm

16/