Loading...

Jaya Enterprises And Jaiganesh … vs Karnataka State Finanacial … on 20 March, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Jaya Enterprises And Jaiganesh … vs Karnataka State Finanacial … on 20 March, 2009
Author: N.K.Patil


TEE 13:32: CEZELRT 9:? §C,AR3’u'”ATAKA sq’ flares ALQRE e.:.P.:’.¥:.:..a52-3 9:? 2,099
.4-

W THE HIGH COURT OF KARMA TAKA A T BANGALG3§ V.

EEATED mzs THE 20TH am? 0? MARCH, :2,cr:::.<V§:»'V' A.

BEFORE

ms HGAFBLE am. JUSTI€§EA§i;K.PA:~1ffL: %

'w.p.z€0. 6538 0? V9§109i%€€'#§»gV;;:5F*'3}V&V%* = "

$A'r'.»'% EN'§'ERE3'R3SES gag sazsarqgsa 5%"-."ERPR£SES . V ,
camzaa commune' V V
aHAvAa1':':-MTREET cam? RQAQ; » »
3¥1A%-%S§LQF?iE-5?5 em

339 3*; zfrs MANAGJNG PAR'n_~;£~::::_s V

1 I 3F€Lf3ANE$_H E-«?L§TTUF:AS!Q D~E:vaD?&é.j~~.VV ' "

AGEDA8Qi;f{55V:?s'E§x§?..S''. '
2 $AY§E{i'Hi"GVV¥¥.*<f&GANé$Si'%V§ f'U"§f§JR

was AsaLV:f:TV 43 Y'EE#RS' ~ . V 'V '

' V' PETWGNERS

gay Sr}: K c;4A%::;RA$HE-:<AR;V'aaféistfie :;

_ me; .. 2

2 }RAT£Q%»é

. .V samavaaz 8%J£L£3é£*u’G
:’:;a.sr4?s HGSTEL RGAD
‘ %e’§A§*i@AE.C3RE–3

RESPGNDEPQTS

” ‘ ” ‘{5}? Sré: T K VEDAMURTHY A39. FOR QR? }

25% THE EHGEE’ COLERT Q}? KAR§§€§.Té§KA 9-£1′ 3A£*é{35’a{.€}R£ ‘%3v’.P,,Z’3£3r’ 6538 «sf $339

HEQEE CQEJRT ‘Q1? KAE-i_Z’~fAT?x§§£–\ A’? E?1E’~§€3 §X§.,{}’E”;’3 ‘§.P,E€<:s. 6533 of 2131}?

1

-_-«.3

3. ii is firm case 0% the petiiéczfiésrs ihat, they have
submétteefi their represenfations vifie Armexures-H and J

dafed 12.1.2089 Qfid 12.22899, requesting

fespandenm-Snrmraticn ta fix the one time v 2

Rs_6’2,G0,GGOi- sifice severai G€)¥’!C:€*.$SiCtE”iS weré:._gi~i_e.hL’ ‘Err:

ether bczrmwers énciudéng waiver eff i:”®;’e;«;$i«_T;a#ici

ihe pefiiianers 29 pay fhey .i:::_§ai:a:Afi:~_e; “* amr::j;*3§’..

§nstaiiments ie. the baiance émaufii
aiyeaéy paid by them” :V%’.éeif:é’ib:5gfingAA fhe said
fepresentaticrsg, 4rg~§:'<;;3cng:¥'é:*:.i..':*i§l'::h§a+:x'v§. _ 'tfie impugned
c<3mmufi%c9t%:§:a§"::fi iaefitioners is
pay their Branch affine,
faiiing v;¥?1%c'h.'_ ievfil take further recavéry

actia:1.__ BéifugV"agg–:'iéxoféd«"'bLVby the said wmmurticatian,

" ';3et§§iéfie;,.s: izava ' §:ii"&$'Te7nted thés wfii fjfifiiififi, seeking

aa siatefi supra

A ifinarefué perugaé ef the rrzateréai avaéiahie cm

z 'ér§::§ué%ng fiia Zwmuniaztfien issueé by 'the

I
1'
3'

/'

"EEC. §§1é§EE%Qf'{}L-'R'E' G'? :3? §z§a}5€:?iL§}E 2'-.5. .1'v.?{::' E3333 £3? 2&3?

EH EZE IIIQEE C'€3?}RT K..AR?»§A'E'.5'1§€.e'1 535$' E€¥'~.l'£G :"iE.£'eR£ '«3s'<Pf£\§é3, 553:3 é::~f 253%?

-4.

§e’$§Gi”idefi’?2S véaje Annexure-K Eciaiefi 13.2.2€}O9___, it

emerges that the rveprefiefitatéofis given by the pe1§’i?ti::~’i’%£§2V::”‘:§._’

have been camicéered ané impugned mmmur2.§fiaiiaf3”L§#%as_”’_”T ”

been issued by the rapcndefitsf §fi$i£3C§f

aévarfiage ef the comm:m§¢3iT§Qn_V’da§’éc37i
by the rmpandents, pétifimegfs-irué§fied ‘bef§3re this

Cam: by pfaeniihg th£_ge$§d*_V__ “*§js:j $3*3fertain tire graunds
urged “in v§*f§§”‘pé%itEnn. Therefére, the
writ pet§*i5i7<:ir'{fi'.ie'd ié iiahie to be dismissed as

i"%'si$- csr°ec::§%x%"e:£_," 2':s;=$s-sergrérig fiibarty is the petitioners to

§s:=é'r&$§ 5:¥1eé§*..'gr§e*éé'fiéé izrefsre the respcndems, if m

arc§§'i$g%!d v%"§;£ifeé' 1~~arise. Ordered accardiragiy.

Sd/-»
Iudge

_ {E4 E5 §fi€31IC-'¥.'}L'R'i" £3?" §<Z.$.RZ*~E.§s.'E'AKA K2' ?«Z"§AN$!%.L£}R_§ "a¥",?,§'x§i;;~,, 53%? 43%'

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information