High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Mahadevappa S/O Channappa vs Smt Puttashantha W/O Mahadevappa on 30 August, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri Mahadevappa S/O Channappa vs Smt Puttashantha W/O Mahadevappa on 30 August, 2010
Author: Subhash B.Adi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARHATAKA AT BANGAIAZJBE

mmn TI-I13 TEE saw my <31? AUGUST 2Q_1§ " 7}'  V. N

mamas

TI-E I-IOIPBLE nmgusncz     

 W%Nd§3054_' %201Q    ' %  

 

E EH:

Srimahademppa sic CI:;"am1£ippa,L" --. 
Aged about 37 years.   " f   
Ritz:    .V 
Kasaba hobli,  ialgzk,  -  '

Myaore      x  

(By &+i.H.E."'§'...§'§:§£i:  Patil, Advs.,)

 abccut ymrsj.

V.   ' u."§.,f a.  pw,

  
3.   

V Agefi"ahout3yeam,

V. A'  2 & 3 am mmm
Vgfiuardian-Rasporflent No.1. ...RESF'C)NDEN"I'S

'% Cr1..P. 75 filed urulair Section 4% of C1r.P.C
p:rayi:1g 220 am. asida the order dated 23.12.09 on the file
af the Fast Track and Axid1.S.J., at Hnlenarasipum in



Hoksnaragiptiia-'V U V' " "

Cr1.R.P.No.319/08 and also» the ordm (sf 

mainfmzanne passed by the: C.J.(Jr.Il'rn) & 

Hoierxarasipura in Cr1.Mis.Ho.24[ 2086 dated   

Thin CrI.P. coming can £03:    " 

Court made the  

Retifioncr has eafied mqum-m 

23.12.2099

passed in file of
the Fact. Track ” Judge,

Hobnarasipurg, am 1. 12.33
passed by the 1mm JMFC,

2, Kohl-wifie and In-wpandents 2 and 3

wlia Vv of the patitionm when film! an

un.de:r Section 125 of Cr.P.C., interalia
‘A monthly maintenm. an the ye-uud that tha
V Lfiefare the trial court, two wimmaw were eaxamxmcl’ and

Ex.P1-the RIC mm of ma Land. belanged to the

pefifiuner was mxlned. On behaif of pefi:t.ionex, Rwa 1

tn 5 ware. exaxnizwd and Exa.R1 to R9 were

On appreciation cf the above matmials .. V.
partim, the trial oourt found that a sum of
per mamh to web 3f the V’
m would be
ardared £9: Rs.1,DOD]- per to V

the rwpemenmfl As
fled a. revision 2003. The
revsssanax of the mum

agam at pefiitian has hem filed.

3, for the peztitimncr strongly

‘ dated 1.7*.2m5 amw to have
” beween the: mtitisaner and the

wmm aim has stated that she Idt

on her awn and submitwé that, in Vii:-W of
‘ ag:t%1:1t, there is no dfiwn arfl she

“if claim .

4.12; 5» mt 1’11 aspute that aim the alleged

a.g’z’eewt,itappm1-5, tbs petitinner has mm-zrifi. It 1a

,8
<"*'