IN THE HEGH COURT OF KRRN%TAKA AT BANGALORE DA?EQ THES THE 24TH may 0? MARCH 2sa§«§*, a PRESENT: THE HON'8LE MR. JU Tigfi N. KQMAé;»" AND THE HQN'BLE MR. 3933393 gfisg'pAcaHégQ3£ E WRIT RPPEAL No,586 BE?EEEN: 1.
FKTI
53
.;E::=.=
_.’ .
Sabitha, V ‘ g ; ;
Wis. late{V.R;Sundar}'”
Aged abQut”59xyéars,_W .
No.2/2,’KenSingt0n_R§ad;~7
BangalQI@?§6QQQé2; v_”
V.S.Sh3§mugamgV V4″, _
S/0. §3t§_V§N,Suhda:;””
Aged abCutvé8 yéafigif
No,l9l, 2′?,’B*’cross,
B©$lur’2″d Stage,’.
‘ “-‘fi&ngalsrEj56G G?§.
‘v;s.Su:efida:,
,SfQ. late V;N.Sundar,
Rgéd abéut 4? yeaxs,
Nd;8,jMatédahaiii,
R.T;Nagar, §angalore–56O G32.
V;$,Gautam,
2 SfQ. late V.N.Sundar,
Aged abcut £3 years,
fNo.2/2,
Kensingtou Read,
Bangalerewfiéfi Qé2.
[By Sri. K.S.Eevaraj fer MES. Lexgiexus, Advs.3
u£K£R;RR[S¥fi3
%??ELLANT/S
L/.
.°=&Rf0.3AilalaSandra Village,
.3. 3peci3l’Eéputy Commiasisner,
2 WA No.586XO9
AND:
3. P.Ramaiah,
S/0. late Poojappa,
Aged about 55 years,
R/0. Allalasandra Village,
Yelahanka Hobii,
Bangalore North Taluk,
Bangalore~S6O 064.
2. N.Munikrishnappa,
S/0. Narayanaypa,
Aged about 58 years, ,
R/0. Allalasandra Village¢lV.”
Yelahanka Hobli, : a l
Bangalsre North Taluk,.’L __
Bangal9re–58O 064. ‘3’ “”‘
3. §.Nagappa,5’* g
3/0. late Eoofiappa;
Aged amm: 5-0 _ ,
R/O. Allalasafidra Villaqé; f
Yelahéfika,EQbli;’ ‘ “””
fiangalore N¢:th”Taigkfi .’
Bangél0re–E6G~§64:_ H_”
4. N.G0p3i;a v _ l
Sfc;,Na:ay&§3ppa,’
Agéd about fifiuyggrs,
»vY@lahankaVHQbli,
,”SangalQreuNQ;th Talak,
zBaggalo§$@36§ O64.
,_ Banq3l¢re North,
xfiangalare. … RES?©fiDENT!S
‘*l{By;Sri. H.M.Man§unatha, AG$. for R§.}
42%’:-~’:’
This Writ Appeal is filefi u/Sec. 4 of the
Karnataka High Court Rot, praying to set aside the
Qrder passed in %.P. No.Z497/Q9, dated £Q.1.G§.
3 WA N0.586/G9
This Writ Appeal Coming on far ?r@liminary
Rearing this day Kumar 3., delivered the fOllQW$flg3
JUDGME§T
The agpeiiants have preféfrei’gthi$ .appéai}
challenging the Qrder passed b§.fih§ ieégnédzsifigfié.
Judge, refusing ta i$sue.*a writ _df Wfiéfidamus
directing the revisiqnai authdrities %d»di3pos@ of
the yending revision eipedi;i%§sly.n,
2. The_.c§se Qf ‘tbe._é@pellants is that on
G4.C%9.192€1 1:-gvi’/}4;…_73–i:a§:d;g..;%3-._V15-3&i’¢_’:<;s_» and Tile Company
purchasgd thé iaQ&sVb§a;;ng;Sy. Nos,é2, 44 and 45,
totally m¢aSuriagUZréc@駰4 guntas at Allalasaadra
village, Yeiahanka Ho$li, Bangalore North Taiuk,
finder 5 £egi$tered"S§ie Deed from its previews owner
vSfi;TH3§ala§i4Nagappa. The name Gf the company was
enteréé in"thé mutatiwn register 56: the first time
'on 2§.Q4.2005. The said eatxy was made in the name
'@fn§h& démpany. The fiaifi orfier was challengad by
-théVféspGndents before the Assistant Commiasienex,
a QhGT affirmad it by firdar dated 68.38.2386.
‘u”Agg:ieVe§. by’ the same, the resgondents have
preferred tha ravision before the Qaputy
Cmmmissiener and ii: is pending. Bath the parties
5 WA No.586/89
Therefcre, we do not find any merit in this appeal.
Acccrdingly, we pass the following:
The writ appeal is dismi$Séd;V.”
Iuage
[ :uége
K5m*