High Court Karnataka High Court

Macha Poojari vs The Land Tribunal Kundapura on 4 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Macha Poojari vs The Land Tribunal Kundapura on 4 December, 2008
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
MW" w'f77'""?',ym%» WM -mnafimfiwuw' "'"WH wwwaw we" mmmmmxneuas. macaw LUUK! U?' %fiKNM¥%%fl% NMEW €;:€:mm"¥" C}? Kfifiwfiayfkfifi W§'»i'.3::*-W C

 

HI  I~I§.GH SCIURT QB' Kfis.RHATAKA AT EANGAL€}RE_. 

m*r1a:§3 THIS THE 4% DAY' 03* nacshmsa 2O£38:'--V

BEFORE

THE' HQNBL-E Mmmsmcm swam'   

wan' PETETICSN NO.119T1<)   

 z

EASE-E. mama: v_  ;
ififfi L?;.'E'E mwrmm    _
3-*-.2353 Aswr 68 &'EAR.s..'- _  '
3.=sm~:ANA   "
mpmma ".3I;:sIu§§QT-E; 
§'='£3'%3Bi§kFUEF;  'V  ._ 
mm: DIETP;-ICET  . 4'  . 
202%.? _frf£:3.fm'::;1i;a'3:::;:_: 5':'r5__ "232. 
   '  '  ezrxnoiu

{Eff :  i=:£aRBI{.§;K3§;.1i,"--.§§L:iv~; , ;
nu : A V
 'V "1; .    jfillifififii}

§::m:12%.r§§;..   . _
 ;.

 L» %;2";'_'¥£IEE~.£1*'I;E'sz"Z'11';L:":1'fi'--,  

24'md("'€h mimwmvmyz Nmi"¢wwm'>c\'.\m sn*mn"wm%\|k4saum»

 

2

-3;? THARfiEATHI 535 232.
... axsnonazlgs

{By an: R. magma, HGGP 303. R1 ..  
53.1%, Lamar, AD'JQCA'I'E., FOR 

aims wax? mrzwszmx Is_;.§<::xm:r2_*'tii#t:£::§.» égnixczz 

22% AER 221 my Tsm cazsrsrxfjrixrxom' 
§§e.:m:%s:r.~2 233 QUASH Tm: myznaasma ~:.':R.1:é13;P;'~ Am' 23:5-'-é:=;,.

m*.25"§,3.983. Eazasssa ax I'2a:s=--_R1.. 
2:}: 55: 3*"?-1.51 as <?rE.AN'l'I}«Ii5._  :::?c:<:1::y2;r~:'<;*z"~v._j:m--."-.r:*r IR?'

EESFE{2."3."' 2:11? mms BE3»';Rfl«EG* s*:.N':::.,;'*--3 LSEASURENG
3:3 szmwrg, my :;2PaHng_..__3}z:LLaGE,  TQ.
mug: 3:51'. :5 =::a;~2c:_Em_z'En_.V 

THIS WRIT V%§1:'z%1fc:»<::r¢s-{ v§§€f§§~«§ C

 

3

herein The said order datad:25.9.1981 is called in

quastéizsn in this petition.

*2. Emma the arder  
passuafi in fanmur {sf  '
wcupamy rights to  m§"'1%.fid x ,
secaorgfi order passed   without
hem-mg th: mmagggrig  during
the wxxregg    filcd by tha
fifititianag"   are the rival
 = figzesticrrn intimatirzg the

Cmurt ihavf.-_ fiije'  'settled the matter
amieabfif. _   the dispute among

 1935.2 has nu ohjeaticn to

-. .» W» ,.. wwA"w<awna \m::r"*vM:;.5"'r:a:e=\rw:Wo,, w a

a.1m~;2:'i  'vV§:ge§tition and quash the impugnad

T gm gaa:ea:25m%g;T19s1 passed by the Land Tribunal,
  Erm jam: mm in duly signed by both *
  i.e., the petitiarnrgr and respondent No.2

‘ rsa-spestive counsels. The same is taken on

V3

‘4’V’w?-“*1’w”1e’ml1 my x’»’VeM”‘¥1,«*¢<1?w&'WS\S(""699c?l"'\'6clti'@.!¢I'"'£a !&'.*2&'fi«Wl*.'§ M«m¢'6ww.i¥ Wfi M.1't"'飔‘€hiNw5i'”£$ éHN’§&M’¥fi MW

4

reswde me counsel for respt>:r1dzent No.2 Sri. lathif

submiés mat respondent Ned has no cabjaecstien

qz.1a§1 the impugmd order.

3:. In view at’ the abmm, the n

ma.de:–

Empuwad Order

pamzi by the Land atands

%.

Sd/1″

Iudgé

g *§g;#;5}12.a9