Smt Peddakka W/O Obalesh vs Smt Kadiramma W/O Subbaraidu on 21 April, 2009

.«s~> ~

w? No.60139-140/2009

EN Hm HIGH COURT ()1? KARNATAKA _  '
CRCUIT Bmcn AT DHARWAD  V _
DATED    
BEFORE ,   " ' 
TEE HONBLE 1\2m..31T;,s'§1<:EV;_e».JI'i"-J_.<3U1»::;»;;.A'~ . ~. " 
WRIT PETITION NO.6Qi_3s?~140i2€)C9(GM»C?CJ§._j '    

BETWEEN:

1.

SMTPEDDAKKA,  _   ;
w1ooBA1.EsH@MARENNA;p' :
AGE:60 YEARS,   _  1. A 

   4"  
szo OBAm"¢SH..@-Ix/DLRENNA,   .
  »    

 Rf;5f'D;NC;??;
WARD NO;-E.5,.._  ' _  . 5
S UR.AACOI,Qinfl;' 

BBLLARY ,..PETITIONERS

(BY sR,I,MA1§iJL11§iAT1?1--A AfI1., ADV.)

- _ 
*a:;0.sLFs'3AR4a1DU,

'*  AGEf34 YEARS,

R10 TALAPURA VILLAGE,
A3§§AIw*TAPURA DISTRECT,

 SMT.HO 
= W10 NARAYANA AGE32 YEARS,

OBALAMZVIA,
2:)/o LATE OBALESH @ MARENNA,
AGE29 YEARS,

HAM33A1\FN'A,
S10 LATE  A AGE}? YEARS,



WP No.6-0139-140/2009

STUDENT,

ALL ARE PRESENTLY R,/O D.NO.126,
WARD N016, SHRIRAMPURA COLONY,
BELLARY.

(BY SR.I.M.AMARBGOWDA, ADV FOR R1 1'0 4.} '

THIS PETITION IS man UN9En51_.AR*;*zc1§BS'TT2:6. my V5227 

THE CONS'I'I'I"U"l'ION 01: INDIA pagmrs 'PO SET ASIDE Tm. :oI<;mRs' 
ON ;;A No.9 ANE 1:) D'I'.}2.}2.2003 ON 'I'§~m,F§1.E o::»':';§;13D:,. cxvn; _ w

EUDGE GRIJN.) BELLARY AT  AND 

was PETITION COMING oN_,wé§1{.p;2§,Lus4na;AR%{  nu
'B' GROUP, "nus DAY, 13%: com?'  FOLLOWING:

pefifioiggr as  .«.1§gany_ 'wcdaed wife and that of the 2nd
petitiouci*V.._\§*ho '(:3xa«;ii.;.?§s  the son of one Obalcsh @



   the  was set down fer arguments, two

  and X at filed to mark the documents

  during the course of trial and also to

 sumfiofi*«:thc Head Master for giving evidence. The learned
  I i'~JAud'ge has rejected the said' application as against which

'  piainfifi's are before this Court.

Leameci counsel for the petitioners submits that

having regard to the serious dispute intersse: between the



WP No.60139--140/2009

:4:

Judge having regard to the seriousness of  
Indeed, the P" respondent  V 

wedded Wife and respondents 2 e._’,1*e«A.:o’f«
deceased Obalesh @ ifid§é,a,V e,
requires to be decided after to

all the parties to thevdffohslity of the

circumstances, the impugned 1iéqi}ifes–Vinterference.

7. paggsedz

The .?rhe impugned order at
Anne;n.;re:~C; ” Both the applications {A–iX
and X are entitled for costs

quantified at –. Before marking the documents

the witness, the petitioners shall pay the said

:fi_:~V,v_thVevViespondents. It is only on payment of costs,

the’—ap;j;ii’ez:«*§ions are granted. Cost is to be deposited within

six weeks. If it is not deposited Within weeks, the

d’ pefifioners are not entitled for the benefit of this order. K

salé
‘Jm’ “‘ Iuddég