.E.
IN TI-IE mag COURT or K.ARJ*IA'1'A.KA.,
DATED THIS THE 22% DAY OF EEBRU;Je*1, I2oGé _ J H
BEFORE
THE HONTSLE MR.JUS'l'ECB_VRA§?iMALIMAT§i.. :3
WRIT PETYFION No.1468%2 /@1005 (LB;B34P) 5
BETWEEN:
SMTASUBBALAKSHMI _
w/0 SR1 saws sHI5:'m'~Y _
AGED ABOUT_.S'1''Y__EAR'S'' .; A' .
R/AT N().217/34-:;_ 2Nmv:Ai'I»1'i;- « =
GANESHA . B.L(.)CiK, ' 8'?bI.. _C:RC:$_S ' « 1.
'MAHALAE,iSHMI' i4,AY€){JT _
BANGALOREASGO AA *
- 4- - " ...PETI'I'I()NER
(By Sri M ER2s9;=5AvREDDY;'*';ADv. )
J A. H .....
1' ._ THE'ac;:N'ii£3OMM1ss;oNER (WEST)
A BANGALGRE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
MALLESWARAM
BANGALORE--56O 003
'Trim ASST REVENUE GFFICER
j 'MAHALAKSHMI PURAM
; BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
T BANGALORE Q? L
1, petitioner is that aggrieved by the
TV .2() Gf3, A3311 respondent herein preferred a
H the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent
the ixnpngled order allowed the appeal and
‘ s»:,%2?.g;asiae the khata made in favour of the petitioner.
Hence, the present petition.
-2-
3 1;) RAVINDRA
3/0 C} R DIVAKAR NAIK
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
VI BLOCK, 11 PHASE I
BANASHANKARI III STAGE
BANGALORE-560 O85 _ ‘- ._ ~ A . ;
.,;’;-.REsPoNeeN<TS'=,"" "
(By Sri : SHRINIVAS M KULKARNI ;e—–HEMANTH ‘KUMAE’
G.N. FOR R-3; SRI.ASI-IOK I«L_ARANAHALL;, ADV. FOR R1 85
THIS WRIT PE’I_’fE’l_QN IS’ I4’iL.l;}F) ‘Lessee AFETICLES 226
AND 227 01:’ THE;”CG;NS’FI1’UTi0N 0F’I-NDIA PRAYING T0
QUASH THE oger.-18 eg_\ssep__e3( 121 I1′! CASE No.7/O6-O7
ON 3.8.2006 AS PER>.AN’:+zex;A-.VeoAz*;L> ENDORSEMENT
ISSUED BY THE “SEC(§=.;!flD RESP3’i’~lDEN.’i’ DT. 28.8.2006 AS
PER ANNEXQB. ”
THIS ‘w’m* ‘Pe1*i1′:o’N._LV’eeM1Ne ON FOR HEARING
THIS DAY,THlE;–1LCOURT Mg\:)E’–THe FOLLOWING:
endorse1eent:””‘ieened by the Asst. Revenue Ofiicer on
xii”
..5-
endorsed by the Asst. Revenue Ofiicer V’
12.7.2005. In that View of the msv.tteIj”i..Vf;ind’I;1§=_V._ ‘:V” Z
reason to sustain the impugicd _orde1;.*..A
For the aforesaid reasons, ~w1′:i.t_j. pt-3-t.:’iti{:-31 is}
disposed of. The order dt.””f§;08.’§!_{)fi;’)6 by the
1st respondent is q;_u.ashe{i§” V’ ”