Smt P M Latha D/O P M Munihanumaiah vs Sri H C Rajakumar S/O Chikka … on 27 January, 2009

13 was 3:33 COURT as Kaanamgxg AT EANggL§g§; g

DAEEB THIS THE 2?" BAR GF JAEuARY; ée¢9"'

933333? 5

was HON BLE MR. JUSTICE  KfL,MAfi3fiB&ma"; v 

Ans-_ X A C_uQ-_H;

THE sou BLE HR$,J§$TIQE*B.V,E&GRATEEA

H.F.A}§O.7fi85K2flfi8_

BETWEEN 3

9/0 P zg-‘1«9r;¢m;::a.:s2:t3;~1;as.’£_$”%;§£

AGEE ABOUT 3? 2KmAs;J’*% =

RlA’.T.’. no ._ 32. , . % ~IAR.?%;’££~.1*J}§ LAECJEET ,
3Rn3s?AeE;;4$a,3L¢€K,_–

BAsvmswAgang§Aaa,* ”

BAN&AiQEE Sao¥G?9r_”=” … APPELLANT

(By s:;:_c $”K$§?EGéwfiA,A§v.)

» 3?: Q ¢”Rg§&KuMAR 310 CIKKA MmnDAIA£
“AGED Ascafi 42 ysas,
MfiRUTK14$RAfiSFORT 5 ERAVELS,

. flo.1ia,’7TH MAJN, 323 paasz,

‘=A§g$E1§J:KDusTR1AL Aagaf

h u’SEgR BE&RA$H ccxnucwon,

‘–_”3A:~:GALoRE 550 053. F.ESFQNI2iEN’£’

._..§’I’E§IS BEA FILED U/S 19(1) OF’ THE F.?@3\§ILY CQURTS
§z.C’I’, AGAINST T13 JI3BGE2vfi1*’!”I’ mm BECKER EXATEB

‘”=[T *-1~~1z.12.29e*? pmsmn 1:21 M.C.}§O.’?§’?/2001 an mm zavxm

‘1

OF ERIEECIPAL JUDGE , FAMI LY i’.’..’OUR’.I’ , ,
ALLQWIEG THE 2-‘3.P?LICATION FILE? U/S 13 (1) OF
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT FQR DIVQRE. ”

This appeal ccazzing an ffizr .«;:~::;iefs

HA1~IJ’E.J’b’4’A’fH, J, dezi-vex-ed the: follr.##;§._;f1g:

The I1.<=.:a.z:ned counshe}, f-1:314: after
arguing aha matter this Court.
to gezrmit n:.i.1z§.. seeking
liberty to enhancaexnent of
the the Trial Court,
as and whén fihel arises far seeking
enhancement V 4' t
liberfiy, the agpeal is
'V .'a.Vs~ 'txzgfitlzdxrawn E
Iudcjé'

3fli%
Iuc3§§