Smt.K.Deviramma W/O P.S. … vs M/S Sree Balaji Enterprises on 17 July, 2009

EN "mg HIGH COURT <3? 1(ARNATA._§:_§{Ev

DATED THIS THE 17"' SA?' G1'? $231,? 2%€L%:i§é? if'    AL

BEFORE:   

THE. HOBVBLE MR. JUSTICE A?§ANi§ B'{R;A ::%:;§*;§Li&L 7  

T HGUSE RENT }11E\«'ESI()EJ5b}'?E§T}?I'Z'i£§"§~I Nev  

BETWEEN :

Smi. K. Dcvimmma

Aged about 44 yeas,    if V

'Wife: ;2£'P.S. Shixrarudrzsiaahi. 

Residing az:1~Io.55,      
3% Crass, Adith;y'a"Lajyfé;:t§ "I§:,:  3 .
Ba:1gaz*a?PfiI1a3a:* Roaci;  ,  " ' V % ' '   ' V
BangaIere~~56G-{)98_ '  

{By Shri.B.R.V _'\{'i:»,*ir2\$a4é:*;92V.1Vii£,w.;*'§;<_iwA;}é;%£:éi:':i;)

$34'   

Mfg.  '}§g1'i;:1§p:ji:scs

 '  Ragistered'VParfi1é--3%fs:_h§§3 Firm
"H33-.é§.:'1g its pizza ,f;éf business
_ _At_Pr::mises Néa:.i2fS, know} as

 i= C3s.;mV;:i::-x, "S filtanpei,

'  B_tafng3.'§«:f:'::;§-- 5%; 953
'_    Asfiuis; Kzzxrzar, A<iszu:.:alc_}

  .__. $$$$$
 This Hausa Rani Rcvixian Pciéfiam £5 fiieci umicr Seciéun 46 us? {he

Petitioner

Raspogxdent

Kamataka Rent Act against the order datad 92.93.20? passsed in HRS.
Ne:L§88i'2(}f}3 aim 131$ iii; if Eh: VH1 gigiiéiasnai Smafi Causes iucigc,



3

Iviayuhaii Unit, Baagalurc, (SCCH No.3) aiiuxazing the main  flied
under Sectian iZ'?{2){a}a:1d(r}0fthe Karnamka Rem Act. V' ~ .  '2

This House Rent Rcvisiun Psiiiiun canning am for" gr"(§.2:r3 ift:is 435:5? _im:.= 

Court made the fsllcswéizg: -   ._

ORDER

The Cuunsci for the pcfiliunczx’ rc:n1a%is,§1i3sg§:§:t.”

The ufficc :.¥bjec£i:.>ns have nut §;)e;:5 n t5L§1:s;_)§i<:qi;i~.\_x.?_'.§i§":. Th: Cutmstzi fur
the respondent-ca»'eaiQi"'xi%p.§1i<§ $3_ub3n§iV i§£2:£_ i*§ ie» .r_s;;V£;§,7und:ni–caxrtaie:r is the:
landlord and that he peiiiiun suit premises as on

2 5 .04 .2009.

In i,’i1isVxz_iVmn.r L3f”§.’§’_li3 ni2;:£.is&’,, Eiiét pciiiiun E3 rsmicrcd infrmziumaa and is

a1;t?3r:§ir:g;}_’§k’L’:iis;L>{3:sc;éi pf. “”” ” A

Sdf-as
Iudgfi