32% '§'HE H368 CHER? SF KKRRATME, BANGALORE 3'?-A'I'EB THIS 'THE 25%! EA? SF' Ai.I§U$'I' 2039 BEF~*I3RE ?HE H$fi'ELE M. JUSTICE Janna n3ai$a.'§"
rum. Ne 16 :33 zsgéa
$9.333:-a V’ F
‘1. 3 E P’3’i”PA3h’E¥-§’imh’DPs
SIHCE 133613 3? H13 ERS
sznnamananng » _m”
350. LRTE PE3’§”I’}%3*A’i1?sIt’Z”:’E:3|fli’I3
:*’, ‘v
Agss A300? 5: YEARS * ‘
2 émsmma
axe. LRTE”PfiTfiA\;_ ?€fl¥fi&_’=”-W»
ASKS A;§_3ez3=zj_ é:z__;§+e.=xA3$_ .
3m; z;;x*:*1iii,P§%§fi.§fia3fsoé3n3″‘
A523 A5Q§?i33FY$AR$u,–
Aga’x3E.R£nw’3infiA;fiHfiAsunA vznunsm
mmmrggmmsan Afrawx.
s.fl 4 ~£,9xRAmEsH”~-.H. …..
F “§§2’E3=§'” L§3£!’E P{.I’?TPaSh’?sMYGGifBPL
»_*»ggEnznaQEw 28 $3333
V &*’.%?»-.._BWfiH§ hbI
a *@Am3a§@u2″wALuK.
‘ “a’ … A?PELLANTS
F :ay’£rivg M awnmv, RBVBCATE}
Burs Luufll or KARNATAKA I-RG5′! OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H36!-I COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CC
K V PAZ*ID£}Rfi2’s1’*IPxSE’I”I’Y
SW13. LETE K VENICE-S’R$E’!”T’2′
}’:£-E}? PLBGTU 83 Y&’aRS
!fii3»’3’i.°é’l, E3LL1I*”J3.’PTE HISEL
S§fl ?ET
?5″{3£3FiE.
. . . RESPCBHBENT
…… ……,u.u yr nnmununnn ruun OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HiGH COURT’ OF KARNATAKA HiGH COURT OF KARNATAXA HIGH CC
533 FELEG V AGAINST THE JUSGMERT
nscxgx &?.2.12.2§fl6 PASSEE xx M.A.no.5!2ao4f,¢m
THE FILE a? was 913?. JUBGE, cHAnkaA5Amas3a5 »
fiISHI$3EH$ was .a?Paaa FILEB AEAINST ?aE.:e§3§K f*
B?.2G.?.2Q6é aasssn IE M1s.&e.$§f2e92jéR”é$g°?iL3=_”
or THE czvzu J$§GE :$a.n$j;u:3£§a”»c;&P f
Cfikflfififlflfifikfififi, nzsnxssxus THE P£?1?ISN EZLE9nE§R
EES?GRfl$IQfi 9? o.s.No.24{93§F,
?his Apgeal ceming an Eek . e;der#”thi§ day,
the Caurt deliverefi tan f$ll¢wifi§{~ *,
Hsttar caizéd in £hé m§rfiing sassimn and was
3as5ed f¢é%r-ft¢ Ififiablé” th§ “learned ceunsel ta
comgxy “with V¢ffiGe’_§bj§£tions. ?he matter is
again calieq in tfie af§ernaen aasaian, but none
»,;gga;i$V £¢r fheHw§§pallant. Hénce, the appeal
‘2stsn£3 diemi$£9& far nanwgrasecutian.
301/ –
.Nuc1gn§
W-fififi