High Court Karnataka High Court

H Ramakrishnappa S/O S D Hanumaiah vs S D Hanumaiah on 16 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
H Ramakrishnappa S/O S D Hanumaiah vs S D Hanumaiah on 16 December, 2008
Author: H.G.Ramesh

fl.F, 11$. 3204/2%

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. AT

DATEb Tms THE 1673 DAY 05* DECEMBE§§§’*.Zi1Ct 23:_’j:. _

BEFORE

THE Hox’3LE MR.JUsT1<§E % . j T

Miscellaneous First An, pg' 1

BETWEEN:

HRAMAKRISHNAPPA
8/ O S: D. HANUMAIAH

AGED AI3OU’I’42YEARS ‘

NO.869, 5m MAIN, VCHOWDESBWARI :.LA{foU*f ”
MARATHAHALLI, ¢3A1§GA1:_.’§Ew:”;v’ V ‘ 1«..AP1=ELLAm*

(BY sI§1..I{.:p.$fi§§Are§g,.;$;Dyc~::Ai1’~E.}’ »

AND:

“§».”.>

1 sv.1:3.H£e.NU1:aA1AH% ._ ‘ –
s/-0 LATE DODDA*BjYF”AFPA
AGED gsozrr ’22 2’35-gs’ ‘
RfATBALLEGERE._VivL1;AGE
VTHYAMGQNELU HGBLI

,.§_NELAMANC’rAI,A TALUK
‘;’3A_.’NVG{§.,_LORE R'[;¥E€faL DISTRICT

_ .. sMT.’~RU.DRAMMA
W5.0«.s.D.HA.N’UMA:AH

– =.AGEDUEaBC?UT 60 YEARS
‘ R fAf”.1″. BALLEGERE VILLAGE
“-~*rH?’AMv3oNBLU HOBLI
NELAMANGALA TALUK

.. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

‘ * HQANAJANA GGWDA

S/O S.D.HP1NUMAEAI-i

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

RXAT QALLEGERE, THYAMGONIELU HOBLI
NELAMANGALA TALUK

BANGALORE RURAL if)ES’1’R’iC’I’

AND ALSO A’? 42/7, 335 CROSS

.fiA. A%%wAfi%%

339 MAIN, JAVARAIA}-I GARDEN
THYAGARAJA NAGAR, BANGALORE}-28

4 }~£.M,GowI.>A @ H.MANJUN’A’I’H
s/0 s.D.HANUMAIAH _
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS V. ._
R /AT BALLEGERE, ‘rHYAMGON£}LL: 4 HO{€3LI V 4 ‘R — -A j
NELAMANGALA TALUK ‘ ~ ‘A =
BANGALORE RURAL £)IS’I’RIC’I'”~.

AND ALSO AT 42/7, 3189 CROSS
3RD MAIN, JAVARAIAH GARDEN V A _
THYAGARAJA NAGAR, BAAr.g3Az,oRE-25.

5 SMT. MEENA
W/O H.M.G0wDA’ . _ ~ V %
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS 1. ; j _
R /AT BALLEGERE, THYAl\.€(}{) Raw H€}£3I;I
NELAMANGALA ‘I’ALu'”i§. – p .,
BANGALQRA; RURAL DI.S’1″RIC’I”~ 2 V
AND ALSO A’}i742,’7;~ km CROSS “” ”
322 Méjixfg’u,{A%.IA;f2AIAH–.._GAR’DEN_
‘mYAc3AR.AJA NA’GAR;’~.iE3’A_NGALQRE~28

6 SMT. JAYA1évaMA; _ .

D’,/O S..£}.H23.NU_MAIA’H ._ ‘
w’/,0 v,RU9RA.RRA'”v’_.
AGED ABOUT 4:’: Y.’a:A’Rs ‘
R /AT 13ALL1+:GERE,_THYAMGQNDLU HOBLI
R.?:LAMA’Rc3ALA’TALUK
,, ._§BANGALORE’–RURAL DISTRICT

– ANif}AI;–SO A’1’42’/’7, snv CROSS
am MA!N,’–JAVARAIAH GARDEN
‘ – ‘ ‘rH’2rAGA’R;_AJA NAGAR, BANGALORE-.’28
* ..R.ESPONDEN’I’S
{BY 52:1}?! RENKATESH. RBHAGAT, ADVOCATE
. R§::R R-1, R-3, R-4 35 3-5; MS. D.sRAm’HALA,
‘ ADVOCATE FOR R-5; R~2 SERVED. ;

, ‘WIS M.F’.A. rs FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 15-; (JR

.cR§: “A*GAINS’I” THE ORDER mt 13.03.2008 PASSED IN

R _”C>.S.;NO,191?/2008 ON I,A.NO.i or»: THE FILE are THE xxxvm

‘ ” -A,.C’.,RC.J., BANGALORE, ORDERING ISSUANCE 01:’ EMERGEN’?
‘ “«1sI0’r’1CE ON LA. 1.

may be directed to maintain status–quo in ~:.)f

the plajnt schedule properties.

4. In View of the above joint’ Mstibmis.-si0:a

the learned counsel on sideAs,._I i1_1ake .tr’:;e’A.fi}l}ov£j’i£1g *’

order:

(1) both the parties to statusnquo in
respect of the properties
in the stiit i;;vse0.s;No;.;917/2:008 an the
the filed

(11) ma to dispose of the
u%ithin six Weeks fmm
daj:e”efproduc”£:ion cf a copy of
1 . .. ‘V ‘it shali dispose of the
ie.Aapp3jcafiefi’¥iIa.No. 1 without in anyway
3 ..iI:{fluenced by the order of status»
..passed in this appeal.

Z Aiipeaz dispaseci of.

Judge