. t BABEEALQRE-58G"0?6., %%%% <4 .
N me man counr or--' KARNATAKA AT BANGA;;£§F{Eb ; f
omen mus THE 03"" DAY oF.;;JNE, 29:19 » jj A Q %
BEFORE ' " %
THE 1-EON'BLE MR. ausncs H..~a_. NAf3Av_i§.éiOHAh§'fi»§i€S:'_V
w.P.Mo.94soi2eo7(6g :1-cpc) '
BETWEEN: X
1.SMT.GEFlIJA A V
we N.C.G()PAL_ ; % % %
AGEDAB0UT453Y£fE..£.'RS'3--_A
2. KuM.Dawi;§
mo av.o.<s%o.=2Ai;L%%% *
AGED A B0§JT zayggas«._ ~.M
BOTH ARE._aEs:DeNG-AT :_!¥iQ :.';'5v6'.
u MAIN VIJA'#'ASHRE_E LAYOUT.
HULRMAVU GATE *
..PETiT%ONEF%S
{awn cmgssj BPAPEGOWDA, Aav.)
AND.:.__
'-»R.GUNA$__E-KHAR
--.SiG*R_AJU
'=_AGED'jABv0UT34 YEARS
am Agnew, NEAR rr: LAYOUT
mmaazauppa
VT " "BANGALORE~8$.
"RESPONDENT
(By Sri M.C.GOWBA AND ASSTS.)
d<-*
ms wan" HETITEON FILED UNDER AF{TiC1;?S§2fiS' x!&%.:A2&£R£':?.V.'
OF THE CONSTITUTEON OF INDIA PRAWNG T0"-QUAQH
SMPUGNED ORDER m'.13.a.2oo4 mPASSE!3""BY_~.THE.V en
A::m..crrv cm. JUDGE(CCHj-'19);"~ «_BANGA1_.;Oi?E.'*~' nu;
O.S.NO.35542003.
This petition coming on far mm-my the f .
court made ma following;
_ egg %g=%}’Tg’ A
Petitioners med me nespmdent for
decree of permanent :?:espond<=.-nw from
iniaerfiering of Z: ' ®ii§tn:cfion on the suit
scheduie appearance before 'me
"man imékazia denying the ciaim of ihe
petitsomkmg On' fl1e.v_ E:é»aa'§us'Aié» "pteadinw. the Tria! Court framed
five issues. :§sue No.3 saga by the Trial Court is as under:
A- " = _ ' thatsuit vafuafion is incorrect and
V pamnsuascmt wart fee?
2. no.3 was treated as preliminaty rm and
‘=. ‘und;e1r iifiinlprugih ned order fl1_e Trial Court directed the petit+one’ rs to
A T:.”v_a’iue sun under Secfion 26(3) of the Karnataka Cour: Fee and
. h K Vaiuafion Act (Tb? short ‘flue Act’)and is 1333′ the dsficit Wart
, fee. Hence mks wntpefifiaon.
ORV”
3. The prayer in the suit is one for gmnt_—efiideeteé
permanent iniunction against the defeigdent. ‘.*in”v*.i.ie:,§5ia:iint.Vti1e”‘ it
peuiioners have not stated flea: git!-5} the
defendant. Therefore the petitiorsegfs hawiieifightiy. ettit
under Section 26(c) of the Act. defendant in
his written statement der:ie€i~A._tt1e do not
fa}! under Section 36(a) of this
court in Ningaev in W.P.5744f200?
disposed on ‘ier permanent injunction
ihe vatuetiee Section 28(0) of the Act is
right and”;t:;}.a:sebte,.V_”iri:e}§:a4i§;« ihe impugned career is iiable to be
quashed. reeeenestéted above, the foitowing:
ORQER
A E) ‘ petition is hereby aitowed.
_ _ iE),_7’ The impugned order dated 13.3.2004 in
O.S.No.3554i2003 mssed by the VI} kddtcity civii
Judge, Bamatore is hereby quashed.
iii) The valuation made by the petitioners under Secfior:
26(c) of the Act is just and proper.
<:7*'""/i
iv) The Trial Court to proceed with
accordance with law.
DKBI