High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt N Anusuyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 10 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt N Anusuyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 10 July, 2009
Author: A.S.Bopanna
 %ILIfiU%'¥@F WWAWKA Hla-I COIH

.. g. mum-mmnna Haul! QUGKT Of' KARNATAKA HIGH KZOWRT OF KARNATAKA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. BAHGfiLORE

narrzn ms 11m 13m my :35'   

THE Homam MR.JU31f$E A.S"E§i?&fi§A Q = 

 

em' E AHU3u¥Amm---- _  y
w1o.urmA J_N.AR£P1'A£{A--«  
AGED ABOUT 7'3   L   k
rzmmxzm or enema: mum   
mm:   mwx

    2 

(BY am  it 

 PETITIGNER

1 

E3!' amcRE'1:e'.xzsr'*:--*<;:' GOVERRLEEHI'
R.E'%?..EH¥.}fE' BEPJKENT

' " L!.$.B'€3'.ILDING8.

~    %rm_AmaEn§:AR ROAD,

 awmwgmox
- 

amsfimax

{V “HA83AN}DI3’1’RIC’£

VVTHE smwnnv

VILLAGE PASHCHAYATH BF Cihfifii VILLAQE,
PG L A%IKERE ‘1’ALU’K
IIA3% DETRICT

THE REVENVE IHSPECTIQR

NADAKACHERI, GAHI)8I CIRCLE, PG GAE
ARSERE ‘i’ALU”K

f&% DETRIGT

$

is

..W…WMm mum’: Wm; or KAKNATAKA HIGH comm or mmnwmm MQQQIEW

OUR

=- -var em 2:

5 THE vI.I.I.At3E ACCGUMART
mm: VILLAGE, 90 mm:

ARASHCERE mun %
3&1: nmmm j . ‘_ % _ ”

(BY am R B mmvmnmvnm amen, age?) V %

mm mm pmrrmn m FII}§D”L’Ei3ER3 ‘£:e2«aT’.%’ V
AND 227 014* ‘rm COH8T1’IUTI<)1{'_'GF nmm L '

memza 01: Ab""£*Ei<'.'tm'.t;_'Y Haminr BY' THE
vmmms Pancnnxmzra av 'vILx.AeE, Aleasmxm
TALUK, IN '2:i*,’ Paopmerm
ammrormlzz Vm’ -_SIJ_’1’3 *s:;I’m$m’.Iw mm or
PROPER’£*%$_:i1iI mxmxna snow THE wan mm

mm “fin FOR PRELBm’IARY
HEAR11I3’TBIS«:§)AY,. comm? mm ‘ms FOLLQWING:

5 and file mam cf apfiarxoe

% amurmxm.

_ an abnrt point arises fizz’ wrmidmation in

_ gtsétition, the saw fa mkem up and diapnsw ofby

A’ nrdm-.

3.’I’hapetim1’xo2r§bei’orethhCourtaec1:itgfora
md&wt&mram1fienmmfimtm
charga¢fmniwmt1mersewtea’afLom1autt:ofityi.e.,

$

‘3

– – .5. …«.vwA~._A. u- nnnlifllflfifl niuri €.’UUllI UP KARNATAKA Mififi-% @0113? OF KARNATAFW, {mum OF @RNA”l’flKfi£ N16}! COUI

the Vifiage Pamhayath of Gandsi Vilma,

Taluk, ta indicafia the mm of the petitianm
warm at’ the property. Tm ease. of the
smce um mm. mm disputa
property between the petitéorwr

amm, the petitioner had % a
o.s.No.7o/ 2002. Tim kajr the

to thc: proparty
which the suit and in this
regard, the autlmritim seeki11g
Since the rmpondarrts
we must made by the

ml mam d.a.wd 01.05.2909 was
% the mum Phnxzhayat ard aka the
Dwpite same of am said 110393, the
% haw». mt acted in aocvardarm with law ma.
‘ «u. At1’;;z’Vfi’afor¢, the pemom mntema that an appropriate
3 be issued to the reapondenm,

J

:1

.. ……….. ….. mm..mm ruwn «…um<-: W MMAIAKA HIGH cmm mmmrnm géméii cram

4. The mm Goxaaz-mat Adwcate who has
mkm nntzkze woufi mime am it is no detain: the

papers produced alorg with the

that the petitioner has suec::raa-dad’ g E

well as a p were %%

the wm’md ‘bf
resvmtza earn:-ies ‘thafsama and
appmpuaaue mum nmzice
to Sri defemanz in the:

petitism H032 and 5 am
‘Vrequmt ef the petifionar by

at maxim ‘A’ in ‘E’

which’&ré: am abm with thc writ petmcm and after

X mm to as. Hangman Elmira, shall as: in
with law ta mains appmpziam remue
rm paawm ahafl furnish the wpses of

‘A’ he ‘E’ along wfth a wwa ceopy cf this

“ardm- an the mm: and mu mponamm mm a

J

I”.