High Court Karnataka High Court

Raheemuddin Ali Khan vs Nasrulla Khan, on 13 January, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Raheemuddin Ali Khan vs Nasrulla Khan, on 13 January, 2009
Author: H.G.Ramesh


rs uvunl vr fiflxlfiifllflllfi Hififl C0951}-< OF KARNAT Hi
' – _: AKA GI'! COURT 01''' Kid!

4. NQTAKA HIGH COURT OF KRRNATAKA !’HGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CPU?


W}. 7

1!! ms maxi mum axe'      %
cmcurr amen AT    % * ' V

nxmn mas ms 1375  

»mfiEA%

mm uownm  
W.P..'¥E9.4G2""' 

BETWEEN:

Rahccmugicfifia   

S] 0 }§ydc1′.I{ha;r1,
Age: 66 ” 4-

Occ:

R/<5 "H.–N;5'.;5~1G;:1V;A;._
Ri?Za(B}, fi?3r.$BFls« . –

Gzifiaaxga. _ ‘ ‘
(By §i’i–.1:§54.;?K.4fa_gi1:1étf;¥*§dV.)

‘– Khan
3/as Hyde: Khan,
” 65 yaars

Ceca Marx name,

V» * s Hospital,

“($2/o H.No.S-101,

A “Ro2am;, Guzharga.

{By 311 v.G.s:mm fer c; R)

..PE’I’I’I’IONER

. . RESPOEDENT

8

“‘” ‘ “””””””¥-‘g_’-“‘ “””\I’HH-In:-5 ntun \..UUKl ur IRA
it _: xunamux 1-new couar or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA I-HGH qoui

W. No. 79 00

consideration of the matter, both the

rejected the yrayer for tempqgfaxy If

relevant to refer to the foflowing f

the lower Appellate

……… .. On ‘ not
proved his lawfixl disputed
open as sketch in ‘B’
all the
to
W: hardship and passed
brdér. Vbiif all the necessary
mgfédfiénté’ under Order 39 Ruiz-: 1
__§ dm’.1 2 therefore the same cannot be
_____

3. the matter in the light of the

‘ “p§iii;ac__ip1es 1aid__iiown by the Hoxfble Supreme Court in
v. mu cmmsa mu (AIR 2003 so
to exercise of jurisdiction under Articles

32:’2»6,. .’& 227 of the Constitution of India pertaining to

cc-urea ‘curtain: may

nu-|I\lIr\lfl’\|v~\ 1’1|\;rI \..\.I|JNl ‘Jr I\f\KE’lI’\i:AKA

W.P.No.40279f2008

iI1ter}o<mto1y orders passed by ate

the High Court.

4. In my opiI1ioI1, fghe V’
suffer from any error ofegeparent en
the face of the under the
extraordinagy under Articles

226 85 227 “i’-Eiidia,

Sd/_

JUDGE

eeeee