115 THE HIGH oomrr or f 1:' "
cmcurr amen AT ' F' %
DATEB ms mm 1113 um? 61§ J*c:1m,
anmnz A T
THE I-I0!I"!!LE ma. .1123':-1c§s« Qgazaox 3.,
w. P.Ho.§'i~f3f95,f'§Qa"9Gn9V{{$§i«£ 3PC)«
nmwms: '
SI-{RI MARUTI"--NIH_GJ'i&P?A (mam, V '
AGE: 24 »
OCCUPATIGQ AG}§iCUI;I'.UFE'E, «
R10 CHU'§¥I€2I:1f:NU'i¥$:,"'I'AI.;"RA'£~:fl">{§R'G,
mgr: 13EL_GAU'h4§, - _ -- ..~. PETITIONER
(BY SR1 R..;_M KULKARSI, 'A.}i§'V;)
....--n-.-----u--.-
A i - 1.. "si¥1R'2":.,Ai;KAP?A"'$AriNABH1MAPPA HAGEE)
'AGE: 594YmaRs, GCCUPATIGN: AGRICULTURE
R/Q "C:HUr~zm--;AKvR, TAL: RAMD-URG,
~. 'ms*1*:« gamaum.
2. énaispxifiasapya SA.N§AB7H}MA¥'PA mags,
Aim: ':54 vaaazs, accmrwrzorsz AGRECULTUEE
* n , *_1R.]G 'CHi§N€Hi%.fl-1%, TAL: Ramnima, %
" mgr: BELGAU-29!-. RESPGE-S-EIWS
{say SR} R K KULKARNI, ADV.)
Pm.)
THIS WRIT PETFPION ES FILED UNDER AR'I'ICLESj226
AND 227 OF' THE CONSFYFUTION OF' INDIA, PRAYIKG
QUASI-I THE ORDER DATED 20/2/2009 ON IA¢.l'$"..),C?._F3i.»I33i)
BY THE PET!'I'E()NER UNDER ORDER 3 RULE§ '}., 2' 'az'.j4
CPC 124 O.S.N0.2/O'? PENDING on THE} '0}? _(:m:.,__
JUDGE,(JR.BN) RAMDURG AS PER~m~.!NEx;'URE:A.»'
THIS PE'I'I'1'ION COMING 0:\':aIr~'o1a2TQRDERS-?m1sLmY;
THE COURT MADE THE F'OLL{)WI?~IG:'-._ '-- 1. _ ,
...w R r>......[M- %
The petitioner has *~r;ha1flei1g'1..tr;v'§thc order
dated 20.02.2009 by-¢§éi§§t,'V:of_Vthe Civil Judge,
(awznj; z.}m§_¢.7 iufi":)}'s.No.2/2007.
2') .._Th.6 case in bricf are that the
respondent; thc 'su:it seeking the reliefs of declaration
. ” Tiiéfiétifim-ncr filed the written statmzucnt. He:
:3′ .139 “Q seeking leave of the Couxt for defending
father and power of attorney holder. This LA.
came” t.9 ~be dismissed by the Trial Court finding the mamas
in that: afiadavit, 111% in support of 1.A., to be scanty.
The rcasezsns shown are that the petitioner is busy with his
agriculturai opcratzions and uneducated. He therefore, Wants
33}!
3.
to examine himself through his fathtr, who is also his power
of attorney hokler.
3. Sri 3.3. Shasay, the learned c
pcrfornrlcd by the executor. Has: there is
no impediment for exa:fi,ii”1§_;;g éfattomcy holder. It
is for the dccidfi value has be
attaclitzjd tr; iaasitimony.
4. the Earned counsel fer the
_ Itsgfifiidents fiflhfifiits the masons assigned by the
£.r; t1;e: aifidavit in support 0f the I.A.No.’? did not
of the said LA.
the reasons given in the petitioncfs
not adequate, than perties’right ta: choase the
“vwVifi1ié–sses «sauna: be disputed. if the petitiancfs father and
power of attorney holder is in the knew-how of subject
$.31-i
matter of the suit, them is no legal
him to the court for the purpose of
Therefoie, that part of the i111pugf,”1’V:1»é(i”‘t;:*cvi’t:;’
him to adduce the evidence Qf hisifatiirzz.’ is to
aside: and accordingly it is set asiiia.
6. The pefitioncr V1{i$–V.¢v1;A£ie:;cc and thereaficr
examine his fathgr 1,3:-fiidcr in support
e£nmdmmmé k§ ,\% ‘. f*ww,
allowed. No oxdcr as to
costs. ‘
Sd/–
JUDGE