IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAN REPBY ITS MAb:A<:¥§_;R. '. .. RESPONBENTS (Bi"'ASRI4'_BASL€':§fA:RAJ 'EQLREDDY, G.A. FOR R-1 T0 4) ?,1f:~I'1~.3% wR1?. APPE;AL as FILED (3/3. 4 OF THE V. 1§Ar«2N }§.'z:4§1§A .3253 COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE (}'i?Dfé3_lf§'. Wm' mrrmon NCL5642/2006 DATED _ 18/ A. .jrHiS" APPEAL COMING on ma HEARING mas DAY, VERMA..}., BELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: "V35 -: 3 :- JUDGMENT
Sri K.M.Nataraj, learned counsel appeared
of appeliant. Sri Basavaraj Kazeddy,
Advocate appeared for respondent_e,..,N9.1 f.’c:$”4;.i: ” ”
respondents No.5 and 6.
2. This writ
Karnataka High Court Act, fi16._ dated
13/1/2003 passed 1$y’ Judge, in
W.P.No.364’24/2?)€}€$;’-»J:i
3. a while, learned counsel for
“permission to withdraw this writ appeal
fi1e:_:£i§i’e§:§:p;:lication for review against the impugled
fifae learned Single Judge. Permission is
fqfipellant may avail of the remedy available to
V’ with bar.
4. In View of the fact that this appeal is sought ta be
Qwithdrawn, no orders are being passed an the appellant’s
“F?
I.A.II/2008 fled for seeking cc.-ndonation of my
days in filing the appeal.
5. Appeal stands disposed “hem
respective costs.
Sd/-r;
"%g %;_".f¢%Iudqe .... " Judge 'Mvs