High Court Karnataka High Court

Kotilingeshwara Finance And … vs U Ananda on 9 March, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Kotilingeshwara Finance And … vs U Ananda on 9 March, 2009
Author: L.Narayana Swamy


flfimw muum ur fiflxwflfiflfifi Mfifi.-5% GE’ KKKNKYAKK Héfiéfé WW Wfi6fi£§'”UW”o%Kfi\ HiGH CUUR”? OF KARNATAKA HJGH COOK”? CW’ Kflflfllfiififlfl awn L’

IN THE HIGH C5158? <13? KRNETAKA AT

was 'I".H'IS "ms 3" any as' MARCH 20e2~=. '~. *~.

BEFORE

ma: HON' ma; 2~EB;.JUS"i'ICEi L.NAmmY§.m:..

CRIMINAL AEPEJAL r:€a,4:s_..,§:5?L 2969?,' 4'

B»E';'S'9l'E3E3'sI:

mwraxxsssrmam Fzmfififiaaxn rm-*Es’§M5jé€rs W®

mum cmew:

mwasfiwaaa 9&3-?..«_ _ 1, V
REP RESEJJTED 3?-1T8 paawnza
eaaazmraa S}-[E’I”I”!~. A

~ H ” .’;v_.£§?v?§3h1ANT
.a.mr3

(av 32: 9Af;s;:§§§’1-c4£:§i¢nR,A_:’..sHafEw*9E;.
Arm: ‘ ‘

_ ._
516 QEJIEEA , ‘
‘-

‘M: u9E:N;«?aI51sa’a1;_ ‘9c.=~:~..«*’z- Ann vzmnas
=r*;ts.1.:.:2;t”_;-

UQUFIV .TS’.E’E.I”C”f’
” assemznan-11*
‘-i_B«”:’ ;$a1~.if: P¥l.A3.§6a’E€fi$ sHE:’m’, Anv}

“–v.L_’-z-V2{:.=;1;::.;§;’L;:v:sg:”*–x3 FILE!) 15;’S.3’78£4} a::a.a.c. av
T1-IE3 gr-.’.D’if’.. .E’f3R”‘«..2KF?’E%£bANT PRAYIHG ‘1”!-EM’ THIS }i0?i’B-LE3

{*»…___c:m.sa=z* ‘;~m””r as ‘2i.’_._.-$.a’3s.3re::’: TO 527? A$II}E THE Jzxnsnmwr ;
GRDER fiat AEQUVITTAL m’.2.12..55 PASSED 3%’ THE :1:
*~_ADDL.CI’fIL; .;r.:.:mE {sa.3x.} & ;::4a*c., KUNBAPURA, xx
“”*«¥:’.’;H-L.’~.*:2§.s5; -._.1szc:.42′?;’e2 mm AEZQLEETTING ‘PI-{E3
:»Va!:s.mr;£>E:i*rxAcc1:35:3 F92 ME 9FFEi*2£ZZ§ .?a’L’f3.l38 £33’
‘=1′-i;1.’.fi»CI.’i’..5

THIS APPEAL CQMIXG QR FGR FIHAL HEARIRG,

1;-§:fs”‘bAv, me: man? BELIVERE9 THE mLr..<;sarm<;:-

i

éwwm AWUUKE ur mmmmaflm fifiéfi $2T.TA'€g'fi*$'§E€E U?' flfidfifiiwfiiiflfifi €i;2%}U%7i"§" W?' KKRNATAKA HSGH CWEJWF 0? IUXRNATAKA HIGH COURT C1?' Kfiflwflfiflflfl MEG?! C1

Remaining amount has nut been repaigi. on
dishonouring his rzzhaqua, camplainant h_;1as_ '~.i 2;.suad

notice ta the accused on 29.3.2001.

4. In viaw of the :3i:–:}$”:>’:zcuAr”. r.’:’haducs2¢i’

about 12 Eixhibitg. mari§a:,1 j’aa”‘..§xa;’P”–1V’AAt9f? P-12 and
on behalf 0.5 ac§:z§’2:;§c§, himself as
D’d’-1. At para N§;.;’i+é gfV-. the court
has gmgg ism:-.3 found that the
:omp1ai€rs3n{ ;»’A:’§§§§ ‘ his case that tha
_-.’*.’V:¥_VaV’V’V*.:he accused is for the
Viean. The ccruxt bulw alse
rgf_e.rré§i” §hat’.’~cé3nfi1$inant has sugagsressed the fact

5_Ae;i.zi;2g f.h’a””‘va’hic1a and aucticning thfi same.

1 IA’.T’Vv-nave game through the amer gasses: by

1:81: V.__’a:i.£::*’.,:.a:’~.”1.A cznurt rejecting the ttczmgalaint. Than is
_ Tnazin£f3′.rmit§a* in the ardax. Hence, this appeal is

* .,.r§.¥jected.

‘3
$1’
.3

Eudgg

P135 .

v-awuvvuunwmm u… …..u… I-IO nu… …u».-ma uuwufvyinv wuvu avimrlvalun-1In*’*Au\r’I uxrvwuu: yam-mvnmm wn smwawmwwmzmnwu inure: mwwmg “.3 Wflqmagmgmmfl flaw” hwunfl ‘Jr mmmmfltflfia

6. In the instant case, aftar tha §§fi§1§ti¢n

cf 3 years frcsm the data Béfflflfffij?
complainant has not cbtaine-a»VA0D, ?ie1$t: _’;;§g:t:§z§ii:z.

barra-:1. Arzcczsrciirzgly, the :t;:3s%§_’6£ ‘um

waa rejected and the “a ::’:.t3ftse<i'-V.§f:a:~V 'afiv§§u;t–1;e;;:..'3
is stxrictly in aC(:<3r:iaIi%§-V',V:§&".'§.V1';h "§*ii';$ :§';.~reVVvf?'isions at"
law. I dc: net fang? the order
passed by the ""'~vVv;Pi{§;:$§£ora the order

dated es.%Jé.%;'j;s3é;%c9 ;3:3t:E.¥'%;:=:
Judge