Shankreppa S/O Hanmanthappa vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 27 August, 2008

iN THE HIGH comm' OF' KAfRNAfi;§K;a% 

CIRCUIT BENQ21 A'I'_.  %  k

    
THE HOWBEQE u1g§R.V 'JTKVSTICE: 1%; ::"V:';II.,I".;;§.?VP.«5x i A: %
DATED THIS _}DA.Y  2003
  r§¢;%3%§%[1%:37;goa7

BETWF.4.E-33$   
sHA§KRE§RA~?;  _ ,~;v 'W
s/i':: HAE€MA'fi?'F1E~iA§PA'  
R/o;n4g§uRAg§V*

~"TK:BASAVEKALYAN

a::xst:§p5R_-,f___;
="' ' '' = = _n ; APPELLANT

(ByskLcHANDRAsHEKAREIENHLQAEVJ.i;

THE SPECEAL 'LANJSA c§':J:s§iT1QN OFFECER

KARAN¢APRoJEcr-_x =j»'~

BIDAR
  RESPONDENT

is U] S 54(1) of L.A.Act against the

.__«ju.<_:1gm::nt' Aawmfi dated 17-04-2007 passed in
_:f;r..»A;VC-£330.46/99–.on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.),

5

f’fI–‘hjs” coming on for Orders this day, the court:
dcIiv¢re(i”ti1e fo11ow’ing:-

{VA

ORDER K
The learned counsel for the appellant a

memo stating that the value of the

Rs. 10,00,000/» and mererom. % me», ” ;ma:,? ”

permitted to withdraw the thfl J

appellant to approach’

According1§?,._”‘:%«– .A is A cii$missed as
withdrawzy ~ ‘E116 appellant to

épproach”v’tiiej: Court.

. ., LA accordingly.

Sd/–

Judge

Nfi