Sri B Umashankar vs The Recovery Officer 1 on 22 August, 2008

0
46
Karnataka High Court
Sri B Umashankar vs The Recovery Officer 1 on 22 August, 2008
Author: N.K.Patil


m 1 m

EN THE HIGH CGURT 0? KARN%TRKfi AT BANG§LQR§* “.

BATED @313 THE 2?” DAY Q€»AUGu3?u2o§S[_”vJ.”

BEFGRE
$35 HON’BLE MR.JusT:¢a_N.k;?aT::; ‘””
WRIT PETITION NO.835lf2QQ?fGfi~C?Ci~.

BETWEEN

SR1 9 UMASHAFKAR”; %*” “®V*'”~v

AGED 44_¥EARS,j” _’»_k”7’

S/Q LATE a53AvAL:wGgp§Ar 1

R/RTvHQ,23}'”ILL»RQAD;*»,-‘

CoT$©NPEf,§_ “; _’g_ .

8ANGALoRE~56flnQ53″,”

*. ~ ‘ *5» “~ … PETITIONER

(BY SR1 T N éaafiuyafifiy é”sMT.@ JAYASHREE,
gDvs.,; 2 ~.

A§D *’

‘3, THE Raéovfiay OFFECSR~I

. DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL

.”‘, HRzs§:’BHAv%N,

V HflDSON CIRCLE,
“BANGALORE~S6O 001

…5_.

Rajecting the application on the tecéfiigéi

ground that the pzeposed amendmant i§’al:

eady7″

covered under issue No.1 is nat7sustainabIefx

The trial Court ought to”xh$§é: ae§iéed’fit5§5

matter taking into cQfigiderationVg§§é”wwell”

sattled law laid dgwn by ghe Apé%*CoQ%t and
this Court in seri&%*b§i§m£fl§fi§; Hence, the
order passed bY_tfié t%i§1f¢§#r% ié liable to
be set a§i§gi@i§h§g%;g0ifig ég%o the §ur1%er

meritsNamdYdéfie;iL3’Qfathe_éase.

5. In _the _Light. sf the facts and

circumstahces_’mi Vthéa=caae as stated above,

thi3.wrif pétifiidn is allowed in part. The

J *Q;déE:ny Z.RgVIL 3×1 O.S.No.9l03f2QO4 cm: the

“z;:§é2§§ tag xxviz Additional City Civil Judge,

{CQQ NQ{§}} Bangalo: Vida AnnexuremF is

‘ahereby get aside. T matte: stands remitted

…………………… §

-5-
back ta the trial Court to r@¢onside§Efifiégs3mQi”
and pasa appropriate otders in éficfififléficé w%fih
iaw after affording reasgnaEi§ bpp0;§Q§i%y:fi@

both the parties a$ expedifiiog$2§”a$’boéfiibie.

bkv

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *