High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd vs Sri Rangappa Krishnappa Patil on 10 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
M/S Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd vs Sri Rangappa Krishnappa Patil on 10 December, 2008
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & V.G.Sabhahit


% . t’Ey..3.ri um xaxsumw H -.awvo<:m:J

11: mm HIGH comm' or xnmmwmm A':

DATED ms ‘.I’I-IE 10″ var or n3c:§n%b5:;n¥A%A2o93?V?:%% v

1’1-1: Horvnn rm. P.n.,Tvp:m1m.n%aN,

THE mN’1aLz: safimnzr
wan’ Pi§17ITI_g:$§:’VN¢3.§Viv;51nG53/2008
And w.p.1~;os.. 1’5422_3_-V-g_§_g2oo’ “‘é””‘:”<';.'..\1""—'c:m{)

—–n——–

1 His JA1″H1I;J§’RRi”GATI0N«,B§’3fE2ifl LTD
;AIrs._2″3.AsT’Vzi:’ mg’: 1-: 365, ants:-roar no
_r&0=’i23.,._ “anL%aGi%.QN« 425001
MAA?£a.9fi.”lfl”5.A._9T3?E, ,rn.x no 0257 22531111

123, ” an w.a*r»r1’a’-«1(I:.’1: PRESIDENT

nannmrne, ._HA?{Ai£t?1-END M am:
V AU’?!-IOFlI._SE’i3 SIGNATURE
,, umauxl. aavpzw xomz

~ ..nmrA:;a:a, JAIN znarm-rzou svswms
.1.’1?ivn:’~,,__::gc:’ s G PLOT no 103, RAHES1-lI’ARY
. JNGKHAHDI, 0131′ MGALKOT
nnaa av’ HIS AUTHORISID mason
HAHAKGGND M JAIN
wrrrzoxaas
CJOIEIOHI

‘ f1 sax muses nrarsmmepn awrrx.

AGED ABOUT 30
OOC:AGRIC’lJL’I’URE
R./O GAHI

TQ anuxmmnx

DIST BnAGALKO’I’ [IN UP l’l0.15163/U8)

“I VNVLVNHVH $0 Lflnofi I-£1-‘nu u…….. ..

zwww W? rmmwmmwa. WWW Lumca tnw mnmmmamnm waw – . .
W mwwm: NW!” mnnmmmmmm WJWW wwwmi Mr ahmniwmanmm wswan mwwnu mm” wwmmawmumlzm munwam Uhp\J’fiJW’fi.W

from the date of purchase of the pipm_s’~.l:’i:i:’i:;

realization and the appellants
ordered to pay ¥ta.3,50,000;’w-tpw§§l§§§$’T’-‘j;,x(.;3If)VO;’ ‘mental agony and

of proceedinga. Than
was allowed by mending
interest at 10% per annum
at purchase of pipes till

and the agnpallants were ordered tea

as. 3, 00, 000% towards <:1:p loss.

V’V”‘A..,I_§§v.25,O00/- towards mental agony and alorag
with 113.2, 000:’ – tcwaxrcia coat: of proceedings

and the rasptmdentzs-3. and 2 (appellants before

K2

mwwfii we” flflfiwflkfififi mmxm Mwwma war wuxatmimmlxn emu-N EAJUKI ur mmmmmamwm Hm-an mwwm Mm” mmuwmémwafi nmrn uwum W?’ mmamwmmnm mzww MUUKE

direction issued to the appellant; ta ::.f1e°5T::’_’c:~;p;ai’:~i,-VV9.’.

tha amount in addition tn the imugfied %fi#¢a .
amount dapcsited as per .ths_’p:$§ifii§fie o: ‘
Sectian 15 cf the Consumeféza ?’_A_A’£’::.*:oi.:’Tiex*v.:V’t:.’§.,’i;;;1′ ‘

this ms.-Lt patiti¢n’ %. “”i§ ‘t1xa= T’

patitinncxs.

3. We ;x3’§ra_ hnqiifi V j:1:;§~..’:’V}3.§é.rn,:VéV£i counsel for
the petit;i<.$1;§§a–§–_V_ 'V Q
4:.'- " ' coumsel fax: the

putitinn§r$ V. that the petitioners

__go§i’=…_<:_&aa3se as they hava already

mnmznt: as per: the statutory

p£\f the District Foam

inipugncd in the appeals before the State

Comiasion.

KM

j “a.€r:a

. 1….

m mg
.1 PD (1 .L?l.-

w m .

P h .

C
Mu …. ..

.1
I
” W
m
. .8
h
t .

. or
0 d W,…….. V.

c e
C 3 ,.._…..

A .% Wm
Au
a a m
I

.£fiZ..4J C52» §.,§Z;.I_:£§.£ :3} .3533} Kfifig m.a£§.3%z2.1.£ .m3.:.§3J $3.3 fififimfigfififi L3 “£33; £3”: €..&§m§?mvm.i.£ ..§3n.§ gag: figfifiwzxéu. #3 wxfififi