High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri C R Mohammed Imam Mohinuddin vs The Superintendent Of Police on 17 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri C R Mohammed Imam Mohinuddin vs The Superintendent Of Police on 17 April, 2009
Author: N.K.Patil
EN TEE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.N0. 9568 of 2069

.1.

av me HIGH comer or KARMA TAKA A T saweégfssgs

DATED THIS THE 17"' DAY 03' 5PR1.I;%;"2'OQ9I:    _

BEFORE

THE HOAPBLE MR:  »'fJ.'KfP)-'_l' 'TfL'--   '  J. 

wmxzo. 9568 oF%2od9

BETWEEN

1 SR: c: R MOHAMMED=JMAN3 MQH:N;;a,b:'w_
AGED 54 YEARS 32:3. LATE-C A:_Bf)UL' s§;2_;--::rve.,
occ BUSWESS      
RfO.NO.193,i'1,HO8AMA$iD|'ROAD,'   
BASVARAJPET DAvANGEgE_5'72a.Q1 - ~

 PE'T$TiONER

AND _ V __ v_ __
1 THE'SUPEJ-§1B1":fE;~:DE:x:_*r"c§-' POLICE
E)A'JANSE£RE_ ; = _ 
2 5 ~ THE cV:HcLE"PCLt¢E wspacroa
.» «  :3'A\rANeER--£;< .F..).tSTv

 i..mxvf;a:x;csERE

' .- f3  T '=g<':=';m£ér2

A 'v~!3{{":1ED .¢.gB€3%.'JT 49 YEARS SIDS KAFZIBASAPPA
C}C€3"-HMBER MERCHANT
T=...'ENA§'§E"f' IN DJNOJYSB 8: 1737
4 * EV Wfiififlfi NEW' BAMBQC) BAZAAR
.. DEJANGERE 577 001

 "  éSOMASHEKAR

SIO.BHEEMA,F*F'P-4
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

GCC BAMBOO 8: POLES MERCHANT

TENANT EN DiNO;1756 & #5?

W WARD, NEW BAMBOO BAZAAR

SAVANGERE 577 O0'?

 RESPQNDENTS

(SRL HT. NARENDRA PRASAD HCCBF' FDR RESPGNDENTS )

IN TEQ HIGH COURT GF KARNATAKA AT BA;-'VEGALORE W.F.NO. 9563 of ZCIDQ



IN THE HIGH COURT 0}? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. 'W.P.N0. 9568 of 2309

-2.

THIS W.P. IS FILES UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 22? OF THE

CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA: PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R1 AND 2 TC) TAKE

ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW PURSUANT TO COMPLAINT,

LODGED BY THE PETITEONER VIDE I-'\NX»A, BEFORE THE 18? AND 2ND

RESPONDENT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE CONSIDER THE SAID .C{'2.MPI,,A§NT

AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH L’AW’.- .

was WP commas GN FOR PRELIMINARY H53,-fiaaréxéé

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOXNINGI

The petitioner in this ptétitiiéshnh hag;_..’:},;oughIt~:4″foIf’~.3

direction to the respondeh=t§;”~I ahd’ .2’tci’V-=ta’Vk§TVVé:§tion
accordance with Iavtr;:4;3ursL_:’alhtg;§fnpiaEnt,T’IoEIged by the
petitioner v§d_e Annexure-A,?I :iaTts:s It13.13.2003 for

extevhdihgtttfég tctthétvpetitioner, on the ground

that, Tw§thoL:t’ Vjbtsstificétion, respondents-3 and 4 are

Int;.erfe_rIn§’»~.I§th”h’Is .§:>e;a.It:efuI possession and enjoyment of

schedule property.

_”‘:'”VA!§’s.=,V~’:”3r:Iy grievance of the petitioner in this writ

fix:-titiéh that, petitiener has wbmitted his

” :*epre§:-;entation- cum» Vcomplaint on 18.10.2068 fer

AA”@§><5tension of protection to the petiticner an the ground

that respondents-3 ancg 4 are interfering with his peacefuI

IN '?}fi- HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE \3«'IP.Nr:L 9568 (Ff 2389

EN TEE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE, W.F.Ne. 9563 of 2009
,3"

possession and enjoyment of the petiticn schedule

property. The said repreeentatiom cum- complaint given
by the petitioner is not considered by the respeiicfents-1

and 2 within a reasonable time. in View of neteny

decision on the representation given _tiyrbjtheiifjpetitiiener

within a reasenabie time by :2, ”

petitioner herein feit nee’e:-zeéteted to

petitien seeking apprepriatefiireetien, as supra.

3. i have hearc§_ ie_a;§nj.ejt:i”–iQc’_;cipi’1:a_eei appearing for

petitivener –!eerned:”Gevei’nment Pieader appearing for
reependents. _

it 4. Afterearetul perusal at the materiai available en

‘ V:V”rece.rAgj;.it./’emerges that, in fact, petitioner has submitted

repreeentation- oumw cempiaint dated 18402088 to

thie~~reependents end the same has been duly received

V’ V. ecknewiedged by the office of the respondents-t and 2.

But the said representatien- cum eompiaint given by the

petitiener is not considered or taken any decision in the matter

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALGRE W.P.Ne. 9658 of 2009