IN THE HIGH COURT OF §(i\RNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2008 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.R. K.UMARAS'WA?;1iSIf':v. '-
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NW1? <§'r:;z;99?f* A 7
!;
SMT M SAVITHA NAYAK
W/0 SR1. H.M. RAJU
we sR1.T.M.MunmnJu % T V
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS r
R/0 No.19/1, Pafisearr MUNICIPAL ‘
NO.S—-04, II CROSS Rom) 4 %
TAVAREKERE ‘ . ‘
BANGALORE — 56G{“:3’1.__ ‘ …APPEi_1ANT
(BY SRi’:_ ‘cf: QEDDY, ADV)
T a>:&;Esows3A ” _ _
A 5/0′ MIHAMME GOW1)A’
Amen Aswr 4:»: YEARS
_ rsso_.sa, 35′” Maxngaoan
” BR-ERDAVAN. NAGARA
TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD
BAw<;Aa.:3RE 560 031
' " PRAsim:'TH K
. ». S/U KUMAR ARADHAY
T ' -AAGEQ' ABOUT 21 YEARS
'– r–1o.9,1 MAIN, 15"" moss
% _ BFRINDAVAN NAGARA
' "TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE – 560 081
2/
2
3 }OSEPH F 5/0 FRANCIS
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
No.28, 2″” MAIN
3*” CROSS, D.R.C. POST
BANGALORE —- see 029 …RESPONDE_!yiT’Ei ti”
(BY SRI: T PUTTASWAMY, ADV FOR R-1
SR1: N M CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY,
ADV FOR R-2 8: R-3)
THIS MISCELLAREOUS FIRST VAPPEIRL men. ‘uNDE~§a,i’Ii’«eVVL
secnou 1m or cpc AGAINST THE’ cagoea ‘DATED maeizses
PASSED on LA. nos; & 2 IN o.s. M9335/as on me F’£LE”()F
THE VII ADDL. cm CIVIL JUDGE ‘v(.E’Re39 3151.5 4_oi= cone or
CIVIL PROCEDURE SEEKING VA(;_P§f’IQN.OF:IN7*FERI!?iv ORDER.
THIS Mxscemngeus :;i=Ir:,sif APi§Ei’¥Lvw..CC:3MING on FOR
HEARING BEFORE comm” DELIVERED
me FOLLOW;fNG; e % e
A in
Lealrned. ce1&rzse§’f§>rAEesf3endent No.1 has filed a Memo
ai§n’gwit}gEneiieerzifieaitdpy’of the order in 0.S.No.986’/2606
in the contents of the ordersheet dated
under:
2 A. “The plaintiff again caiied out, but absent
it génd.i”‘no representation is made for plaintiff and
__1Fm evidence adduced. The suit is hereby
dismissed for default. No costs. ”
l,»/
In View of the said order, this Misceiianeous
Appeal does not survive for consideration and the ~
iiabie to be cismissed.
In View of the above discuVssEons, “tt_::i$. V’
First Appeai is dismissed.