High Court Karnataka High Court

Radha vs Jayarama on 4 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Radha vs Jayarama on 4 November, 2010
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
 A' 'V " ~:<_.UM S.E'I\IAAHIALI_I POST; """ " '
 DAA=.DIOANArI.AI;«I,I HOBLI,
*:cH'ANI~IAI-é;AyA.,p'A..THA TALUK,

 7_R1~SEH\/ED;_,

 _I227--DEA-'THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
--:IMI?uONEo ORDER DATED 15.10.2008 WHICH HAS BEEN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 4"' DAY OF NOVEMBER, 

BEFORE

 

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. \(EA;\I»I.:c3OI;=A'I;A:'Ijc_;O\«~.EDv«,c\V   
WRIT PETITION NO.I35I/2010;(ASTIv:§écéc)'*  
BETWEEN: '    I

SMT.RADHA

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,  ..
W/O JAYARAMA, '   --_
RESIDING AT POTHANAHALLI 
KUMBENAHALLI POST, '
DANDIGANAHALLE_HO.__BLI,W  _  - 
CHANNARAYAPA;TNA«I;VTALuK, =:  
HASSAN DISTRICT.  'V  __ _  

,  ~ .    ...PETITIONER
(BY SR1 S.__a_._MOI§%I<AA;I;I}I_AI=PA'; ADV. 

MM

SR1 JAYARAMAT _   
AGED ABOUT35 YEARS,f " 
S/O SAAI.NEGOvvDA».v'«  '
RESIIDING AT POTHANAHALLI

H'A.SS_AN DI[SIf_RI.r;fT;"'
A  .  ...RESPONDENT

(BY SR1 Z.AHE.E’R AHMED, AGA)

I IIITHIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

Acidlfiovernment Advocate, who was directed to_.t_al<e

notice and assist the court.

3. Indisputedly, the instrument M
(Ex.D-1) has been written on a 3ivh’it’e« .p1a”per.«
instrument has agricultural and noni+_aig–ricultu’rfelA’~p.rop’e;rtyL”

Noticing that the instrument Vis’v–._\§.?itt: rega–.rd ‘items it

of agricultural proper;ty._anc£.ri”t’i:e_:’:%i'”**i…_iterr9r”beinjg non~
agricultural property, has correctly
determined the (siltyanij’ii§§ni§§;ltyeVeégaakozefi18,250/~.

4. the impugned order
has any has considered the
matter “the …_.c.odrArect-ti:eerspective and hence, no

interference iivith the iuépuoned order is called for.

1rr”th.e_vd:result, the writ petition is devoid of merit and

A her’:t*..e%,.iA rejected.

Nrrcosts,

Sdlfi

Iud§3

T i<s§/–