M Thippesha S/O B C Mahalingappa vs G H Nagaraj S/O Hanumanthe Gowda on 25 May, 2009

:.'j'CHvICKi3ALLAPUI§A)

 ARE.

IN 'THE meg com? or mnxarmm AT " 

DATED was we 25"' DAY or MAY__2:"a:I.)9.A_.:'~  % " L

Pmsmnri V' '

THE HON'BLE am. 9.13. nzr:A1iAmn',.V¢H1£::?-v_qU3*r1i:§,* "

THE HOBPBLE m;§.JusTic§Ef--§;G,sA3fiAzifi
war; APPEAL, no. ;4mi¢:= L._5-RES)

BETWEEN:    

MTH§PPES§~IA_V  3  
3/ 0 B C MAE'-iALi?£_GAET?§?A ~
AGE§ ABOUT SG"Y'EA;R'$3   _
R/A BANKERS' 'COLON-Y '  _  

BIDAR . . . APPELLANT

(WAS wQR,K1N-G" CQMMISSJGNER
{:4 CITY, .f%(1UN!CIPAL"{EQUN(:IL

(BY}";3Ri'..i§«TAN":5t;fifI*§§§(§€)wDA, ADVOCATE)

.

_ ‘ x

41- V. BFAGARAJ

/. U-HANUMANTHE GEOWDA
ABOUT 6 1 YEARS

% MATHRUMANQIRA

WRESIDENT op’ PRASHANTHNAGAR
~~ CHICKBALLAPURA 562 101

:?§X}’éb..Hoét}”:’&”§;a€?N’o’

appropriate reiief and with that oioservation,

appeal is disposed of.

However, the order ‘finder :’»appea.l§ is f’1..1;Ii«:i’:;_cV:é:’

abeyance for two weeks.

‘ % _»,.Chief Justice
Iudgé

Index: ¥esfjN{{ A

la ‘