Manjaiah vs Nemaiah on 15 January, 2009

IN THE HIGH CDURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAN§ELORE

DA?ED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JARUAgyE§éé§f*E

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUsI1cgW_g.N.yAGAg§HANEQASE"'

RSA No 1259 Q? gage aEA

BETWEEN

EMANJAIAH

S/O.LATE PAYAPPAGOWDA.

AGE 44 YEARS, '_"a
020; *~
RfO.MARABIDI VILLAGE,
BHARANGI HOBLI.?0ST.,
SAGAR TALUKA,E.«=E ;

(By Sri. C B}--g;NAJ§Gi AEEE ,
smr. NAGASHEEE.%;C. : ADVOCATES)

NEMA:gH'E E »

.-.s/0.~;A?E PAYAPFAWQQWDA,
:. "AG£Q-AB§UT"46 YEARS,
x 3/3 ILAVARI VILLAGE,
EBHARAH§E,HOBLI;

T1LUK'sAQgg ,<»

"_§sA filed u/S. 100 of cps,

"fiufigément and Decree dated: 24.01.

»...APPELLANT(S)

RESPONDENT(S)

against the

BUGS, passed
“’51

(L/.

in R.A.NO. 35/07, on the file of the c1vi; 7i”k

Judge, (Sr.Dn.) Sagar, partly allowing tfié afifiEaii7″

and modifying the Judgement agdmD¢creé”da§§di*ix

3.4.93 passeé in as 314/89 on the riié éi the 2_’:i

Fri. Civil Judge, (Jr.Dn.3, Saga: =

This BSA is Gaming 05 féf Ordéf§; tfiis
day, the Court made théiféiI§wifig@,i._

,~At.§h:’fE§ueSi’of iéaffied counsel for the
appeiifint;’fififii1§”Qfié,§eék’s time is granted to
comply with the”offic§’3bjections, failing which

the appeal Stands dismissed far non~prosecution

“withnfit reference E6 the Court.

Sd/-

JUGE

fiegy

i§s8§§’§§<s'€aa%<%_ 5-fi%.»?z"$'~?
fiétk :}§u¥: u? §w**#55§§
§'$&a1ia.§..§.=. é:,~§"'%"" Egg