Sri K Nagaraj vs Sri Shashidhar Sambargi on 21 October, 2008

0
66
Karnataka High Court
Sri K Nagaraj vs Sri Shashidhar Sambargi on 21 October, 2008
Author: A.S.Bopanna
LEARFQEEE EH i3;"i7}IIi3'E'§(f}N£1i, Civiig JEEDGE {CCH 123?:

..¥.%,:§ N€'::5x'§.§{i)}2§§§ 3

cm', QUASH Ti-{E zmpuam-',9 1*,' "1i=e;;4.2aQ$_ 

mssab «:2»; 3.A.NC3.€:. 

THIS Wm' ?r;';*m«:::z~z c: Pa?';s;v':g':saz§JA}:;?"~V '

HEARIEGG 'B' GROUP TEES D§C{{ THE i_;:m' :sg::s;z:jz§2*i..,ufz'H_.;r;
F'0LLC3W!NC}:       "

QMR :2 :'«:;~";'------ 

 

Hfiarcl Sn M,S:Rajc:1d§«.i'f'fI*asg;€§»;::1e:%ii'1i{::'i Vssmioz' CTCEIEIESEI
appcarizlg on bcha.¥ f":);'."  ié}2f:1f_n.:::i «v:x:."V:".-fizzznscl irtar the
petiiiener and   ,§33'§.."G;.:.'I:».»ViSfifg§5-Eillafl}, 1esm1z3;i

£':O3_1I}S»€1 fez'  1"i3$%3€!i'.i d_€;} 19' 1312:: wiriit papers,

'.2. Tim 'p6tjiég)§hé§*v.I:£5::fi:'::v_":ész £3.12. iififtfflliiallf in 0,5.

N:L13.'39[  §::_T€'i1$...:s11§;§  ;;sle%:iut:if.'f11as ::t(;r1'1tte:1z:i:5ti that

i"f(3.€_Adefé:;;§}i:ia;1: .ifi} .fiF1-(.3? '1?jlé'i§M(JiI:{?i211§I3it3!Zi £136: land' belagyngizlg to the

1j3:a§i3vt:§§1"V   fi1':::f.t ;regard,, the p1ai1:zf:tTf1'has $a:)ught ibr 3

" "j1"idgm2=t11 i  firpr mandatgzy _i1'!j11I31t.'.'f:§0LE} as Wei}. in

 H 4t}::::.y};)c1}d'i;;gv"'s;;1iVi; the deiizynziant has Iiicd IAN'! seaseldng lcava

   fa remove the axiisfing r::¢:rmp<:ru11cI wall bel:33::§'11g

 _t¢:: h;'AAfi} aifitiatserd towairis the western: side Qfhis pmperty and

i

:-
-

towards the castttrn sidg :31″ EDA sift: H0198 bebflgfitié V.

piainififand to emci. a new mmpozmd in its ,

3. The trial C<::m't has Iejeciiegi thé A:-i;§ip?jcaS:bi2V«};¥13VVth§é
gutxnii that it wouid lead _xViinjthe1; finiiecéfgfisazy
coznpiications.

4. On 11ea3f;1}g««;.t:1§*e I€’Ei’£}§Cfi<';i : gyertising the

writ papfils Gniar ii:i'§§i:gi1a¢i' in Ems ycdfioxi,
the pilotegzaphs 'finizcxzrie -C'. to F' would

indicate the efifisicncé' Qi'AAf1i::…_u¢SarJje1* diiapidated compotmd

andxaame subseqtzcntiy. O11 Iloticing

Atim s§a1a.¢;, :11: is«.s«?;§I1.t11at the said westcnl side of the property

in ;i?I:1:i{V:§1__Vt,:?3£é' is presently residirxg is open witiixzut

Vibe: c01ii;wsu;LflcI Since the pariies am stiii litigating

H H " the Court, the trial Caourt pxzéma face was just:i1:n:d'

that at this stage, it may lead EC} znzmetmssaiy

'c}(3m,pl§c,atian. But the £1123} £30111': also has oirseived that if

'*£;¥1é psxrtics am willing he have the camp-r.3u1.1v:i wail

J:

constructed, it would be appmpriatx:-, for fhtzm is do

the instant case, in such a situaticsn, I am cf the fh§f£t’~.§’i1~ V’

otdzer to avoici all complicatiazz, it w0u}a;_i .33r;_a1)p:i5V;§:”i.:§§f¥§V

asgizie the said order datmsl I6.«’~’:r:20{}8 visrhitfiiz 7

this pctiiion and tI:ucmafi:e1′ fiéal
¥A–VI on file and (luring H12 [m’1€’:11£ic:”I:%%V”:f’jg:;,V:¢f’)1″‘-.Vi.f.7.£1IEi’. tlfié ‘trial
Cmart. shall appoint an *~.._'{.§;:£.Ifl1_::1i5s;icsI2e:” in
undezrtalsre the task _<_::f ptittitlg 1-upi' wall as

sought firm 17}3,i,¢'é:.:if,€iEJ%§E'-*§"1iV{15':!'1 ".Z' 3. £=:1"'tzf 'f§tii§:V V Colnmissiozwl" takes
the Eilscr The costs towaxtis

constmlcfiau of:E1;i¢:w;1ii__a1:1:i:iirsépayabie to the Comnlissioner

5!? $6 {3{21_I.I't shall be horns by the dfiézxdazmt.

€31'-:1 »f}:;;t:' *~{?.g::z1:12iss.i_fiS:;e_r submittizig a I'&_'p-011*, with regard t0 the

canfiizfiiiciioifi ..s wall, that trial t'_'.'ourf shal} t1:c1*<:taft'¢:1*

Vd'iS_'{){}Sf3'.%§fVfl_§7 tafiicitzg Iitetff Gffhfi same, The 11% C0113"? is

'aiT3r.:{ {'§i1'§3f;?i€{iV" tr.) giisposté of i:_'i';m suit ifself as c=:x1mr:iit:i¢3I131y as

gggssflélé in this regarci it is cxpecstmi that the trial Cour:

VT a .reas(ma'bie §T§,2I1!C frame for itself to arisetticie flit: stiiti,

1

‘~43

with the ahovc (}})StE’fI’$iE1Ii0!1S and {§jiI1?7{‘.f.}=C?§.§??-; ‘ .t1’_iae:- j ”

Peiifiml afajids (ii8I3’C?S¢3(3 of, N0 oxtier as to c*()§i’;-3:

ARE

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *