High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri D K Hutchappa S/O Dasegowda vs K C Venkatesha S/O … on 19 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri D K Hutchappa S/O Dasegowda vs K C Venkatesha S/O … on 19 November, 2008
Author: B.S.Patil
WP164'?'I;'2006

IN THE HIGH coum' or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE mm mm; 0? NOVEMBER, 
BEFORE _ M  'A
THE HOPPBLE MRJUSTICE B.S.P&Ti.i«.::'~..   % A 
_wm'r pmmox Ha-.1547    'V   
BETWEEN:   '  " - 2   '
1, sxazz £).K.HU'i'CHAPPA,
S,/O DASEGOWDA,
SINCE DECEASED BY "

2. SMT. MAYAMMA,    
W/C) LATE HUCHCHAPPA...AC?ED 'ABQU"I"v6§'~~Yj_3E1!~;i?S.

3. SR: K.H.LoKA2sA"m;Z'~    
AGED ABOLJT 43 &?;;EA'Rs.  4-  .

4. SR1 K.H.PRAKASPi1}_ " V = ~
AGEQ AI:3"C)'UT€E-O Yams.' -- . _ 

5. SRI K.H1.cHI'DA§A1§i>A;  
AGED ABOUT 39 Y_E;.\..RS. --~..

6. SRIH..SR1NI§'/3'13;  .
AGEQ ABOUT 3? YEARS'.

'V " A},'1:AR;E'R isdms OF' LATE

 ' HUCHCHAPPA' 

7. S§¥IT;7DV.'§{.i'§.E§--IVA§'AMA,
AGED AE~3OLF}? 35 YEARS,
13/ 0' Law HUCHCHAPPA.

.'  ' '  ALL_._ ARE: RESIDENTS OF
 KUPPE VILL.AGE,AMRU'I'I-IUR HOBLI,

'~KUi'£iGAL TALUK,
1jUIvns:UR D£S'I'R1C'§'~-- 572 111. .. PE'I'I'I'IONERS

'  "".f}i§§ENDED VIDE v.;



WP 16471/2006

AND:

1.

K.C.VENKATESI-IA,
8/ O CHIKKAVENKATAEAH,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.

2. JAYAMMA,
W/O K.C.VENKATESHA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. ._

BO’I’I~I ARE RESIDENTS 01:’
KUPPE VILLAGE,AMRU’I’i-{UR’ V 2 ~.
HOBLI, KUNIGALTALUK. ‘ .. RESP{§NI_}ENf?S

(BY SR1 J.CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, AI§V..I

THIS PE’I’I’I’ION IS FILED LINDEI2 AE2’I’ICLE 2:2?’ 09* THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRA'{fNG’._’PC§_ QUAE’:’.H ORDER DATED
08.11.2006 PASSED ONE.A.NO.1f1′{NI—O;S.NO;I’414./98 BY THE ADDL.
CWIL JUDGE (IIIe.I;>I~I.IV AND Jrym: AT”KUNIGAL ANNEXE.

THIS PE’I’I’I’1QN I10MIIII_G ILDI-*w”‘ FOR PR’E£.IMiNARY HEARING B’
GROUP, THIS D -“Ii;-*If2IiI=;,_<;:<:I:If<:rj MADE; THE FOLLOWING:

1. XVEEI Rule 9 mad with Section

351 of cm flea by tV1–1e”p%e’ii1j:iO:IIE:I’Who is the pIa1’3:Itifi’i.21 the mm

Court scjéking appai@1§iI1eIt;I.7t of Court Commissioner to conduct

“agld to report the actual position, is mjected by

me’ Afggiieved by the same, the present Writ petition

‘ ifs

I afipficafion was filed alleging that despite an order of

augn

injunction granted against the defendants, the

“”dcf_er;§c1ants violated the same by opening windows and allowing

%