Smt M P Sarojamma vs Smt N Pushpa on 10 August, 2009

1N THE HIGH comm? 91? KARNATAKA AT BAN::gALQ';§§§"   "

DATED THIS THE 1022; DAY QF»A¥;$_QU:€+      'A

BEFORE V
THE HDIWBLE MR. JL:S?1cfi_As.HOK LB.' }~}IDI(§I{fI'tiTf}5F£1. 

WRIT PETITION yo, :c:1Q4{(2Qo9V {GM-C99) 

.BE}TWEEN:

Sm. M.P. SARC}JAMM.A   . 

79 YEARS      

W,/0 LATE PADMANAaH'A SEW?  
No.9, NEW HIGH; sC}--JV0€a'L__Ra;»;:),"~~.   " _ 
V.V.P¥JRAM, BANGALGRE - '550vv€sz)4"' ii.

A  PETITIONER
 '-.{_BY:SRI V';Vj'i2§Sh5V,§'QSI§"EABU, ADVOCATE)
AND: V' 2 L

1_ sm%, N "PUSHPA-V  _
 ' . AGED ;éxB(;m' 45 YEARS
 . wgo SRi«.EV'AIViD_A KUMAR
  R=,tA*;r--  EAST VENDATASWAMY ROAD
R.'s:.,_PU'R.?&M;i:';DIMBAT0RE -- 2
TAMIL NAB}; *

 SMT, *?.P;GAYATRi

.  M-5308;' N0.5,;MA:1~z ROAD
 €'.}AN{")i~ii ESEAGAR,

"'Bfi'fii;"}ALORE 560901

   A   'V   TXM. SATHYAVATHI

MAJOR,
39, K.S.R.'I'.C LAYOUT



V 10.

II PHASE. 8"' MAIN ROAD,
JP NAGAR, BANGALORE -~ 560 (}'?8

SMT. BK. RAJESHWARI
14», VASAVI 'I'EM?LE ROAD,
V.V.I3URAM, BANGALORE -560  

SR} 8.8. SANAJAY
MAJOR
S] O LATE NAGARATHNA

SR1 B. B. VIJAY
MAJOR,   
s/.*1*1«:: PADMANAEHA SETTY
 A {"1f()"}GAYATHRi ROLLER FLOOR MILLS

 _ "ANcs'.'44/2, MAGADI ROAD,
 BANGALORE

 RESPGNDENTS

(BY LAW ASSTS. ADVOCATE FOR R24,
KUMAR & KUMAR, ADVOCATE FCJR R1,



RAE) 35 RAG, ADVQCATE FOR R9,  ,  
SR! ¥-LG. aawcmvx, ADVOCATE FGR 1.-210._.;'  '-

sm V. PRABHAKAR, ADVQCSATE FOR I123?)   '

THIS WRIT PETITIQN IS 1:31.39 uwmzz,A12%:*1<§§';§:§,'="2;2t3.'_garé';:3 V

227 0? THE CGNSTITUTION 05 INDIA PRAYINr:':'Tc;.AQuAsz=1_ 

ORDER E}T.1.4.09, PASSED BY THE. am e:3mL_ .,JU;f;<3E:,._
BANGALORE [CCH--32] IN OS.NQ,I9.]_.80IG4_, "VIDEV»"A;"§I$I~D, ;AND_ 
DIRECT THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE "BANGA!,.OE9;E  RECORD"

FURTHER EVIDENCE OF THE "*E?ETITION'-£R  % -Hgxgsrm BY
APPGiN'1'ING ANOTHER CDM_MISSIQ.NER._AT__HEE' RESEQENCE.

THIS WRIT PETITIGN c0i§41N'x3 QN ._c5r2m3Rs THIS BAY,
THE COURT mas THE 1:'oLLow1_NG:' :   

Sri V.FTabf£§i§§éi:;:f?$.1':<:""1%',ar11V"-'  undertakes to file
vakalat far    h

2.     fias challenged the order,

ag.%g1»a4i2oeg ;a;mm.p] passed by the Ciourt of City Civil

 JudVig"c;_VBaV:.ig:$1t;3;;: {.§::C:H-32) in O.S.N0.9180/2004.

 3,  the impugned erder, the learned City Civil

if:i:"m4sd down the petit:ioncr's request fer adjounnnent

 dismardfid the evidemza of the petitioner (DW«-1). On

4:  the Ieamed advocates, Sri Ramesh Babu far the



petitriener, Sri Pmsalma Kumar for K-1, 31'}. Srinivasa 

far R-2 to 4 and Sri V.Pra'9hak:a1" for R-5 ta 8, 

the considered View that the ends of justice   

passing the feflowing the order".

a) The Qrdtif, dt.01.04.2OO?;_Vis...§et  V %'

the cost of Rs..3_,D00/ mg  The
petitianer shall pay' 'the   'mspondent No.1

within two' _fii:t3eks:"'Vii4t):ii;   benefit sf this

orficr =sft1;a}1'V'ri§)1;:"rn34ma:ii3 'accxfled to the petititmer, if

the c:dst_is .n{it._§ai_d  the pmsczibeé tima.

  13) be present bCf!.".}I'C the Court
V  . '.c'j'r;"  for further axamination and (:mss«
A  The: respondents shall cross-examine

AA Lhei*vv._.¥:«$n the same day. If further examination er
H ” -.£;foss»examinafi0n does nut gm: mncluded an tha

same day, it shall be taken up an the next: working

clay i.e. on 24,Q8.2009.

bvr

(1?) Both the sides shall co—operate with the K

in 1:116 smedy dispasal cf the matf.;t:z”.” .

This petition is dispesed of.