M W. « ‘I lifi’4\e»”‘5l » wwwmw was nmmwwmmm Mimi nmmzr OF E<ARNA"?A%fl MEGR CWUW Q?" fU'&RNfi3'flk§€& H3554 C0113'?
IN THE HIGH cook? or KAanA’rAxA AT V
mm: ms me 9′” mm? M36, A L
me Houms MR. Vt
.. :. I W1!!! 0-. r«.m:- ::a- S
BETWEEN V Q . A’ 1
Wm.
5*’ %
3 am sHofaé1;s.}T f
we; :1 mtmniwpsu
I Juan fi.B_(‘J£:T”32″-YEARS
DIQ $1
5 %%% %j<uM
" I3 IflA
ABOUT as YEARS
R NEETHA
'DIO.NRAMACHANDRA
AGEDABGUTZIYEARS
E
fr-/'-*
(7%
mualuwwmw mwrumn wax mm-answer-mMw\.M Mlwfl MWMKE U? mMMNfi%'§MKfi& Wgfifi fi2%.".%UR¥
(av Sri : ABHINAV R for Q." %
AU. ARE R/AT NO. 1427110,
MAHARANHILYA, R 1' mean
anummae -559 032
AND:
1
SR! 8 N NARASIMHA
sxo. we 1′ mmvmaptaa.
AGED mom R _
RIAT nouilz %
n T
win. “an . SIMHA aeumiw
QRIAT ma: 1?, i<AvALavnAsAuonA
arr.
sh: mmm
X 9/0. B an masuszuius MURTHY
,’ RIAT H0;’1v12,1_KAVALBYRASANDRA
% am sauanwae
Mia
% ” – mtdnlm
Nimzsslaoas rauamv
WAT’ M’D..1~1 M
a:r.
R(_f:T Mass, 12*” BLOCK.
5 7
> MAN, W%T
§
3
§
:4:
x
Q
m
,
9
§
3
Q
L}
55
:2:
§
é
§
§
$55
9
$2
is
;9
:2
§
3
_w,.w……. ….mw wwwmm war’ mmmzwmammm
LA. NO. 4 FILED nxrsc. 1.12.2003 AS PER mfiéxuksc
Thks putitfon earning on for pnlimin=$§”::’~h:fi§:fing
day, the Court made the failowir !:g:~
<)Rf;9§: '
Potftionam an 'énci are
dufondanlx before thy for the
sake of convaniancaVtfi§" fie their status
hefora the u*ialvCourt:..~ j: '
2. <é}é;.a3¢,:%1s2}2oo7 against my
defendants mrmmryofmmsbn of piaint *5' schedule
property. appearance before the
triai cocgrt, étaifiement oppaning the claim of
$¥!!jen'fiV1E'§é§atber was Ikbad for evidence the
pzmursaam;.m.4 undur om: vx Rule 17 cm no
i way of incsorporating part: 4-3. Undor
— impuémé order the trial Court part}? altowed I.A.4 and
‘ –:_.’»”if.:I§4s’r:-sissed. The plaintiffs am before this Court in so
V. it ralahaa ea dismbsal of me portion of the
~ grmndment in LA. ua.4.
Rm%si!5″&M3 fio«éi’V.§WuaMx<:«…mv6o x%K&'.iI'V(m |:..vm …. .
Mfiwbfifi Wfififl’ QWMM
3?
M
g
3
3
Q
3
Q
3
§
i
E
E
$-
2%
§
3
§
3
3
2?
E
i
Q
E
E
is
$
§
3
§
3
1
2
§
§
E
§
2
§
§ ,.
3
3
Q
E
2. Heard the arguments on bath
the writ papors.
3. It is not in dispufiae th$t__ 23V
plaint, tht plairttiffs tliét hfilt
.s.no.2es1I1999 cam; mm ‘i%!%Iv§’i’§V#rx_:miai3nci”-xan”‘:1-4~2O00.
This proposed amendxmrat ii ‘A aéo ” :;_hat that
aomprarrxise decme garijai-_ho 3: shown
to me as us when dated 1-4-zoos
came ta he a;1’aatad§§§;i;;T’é§}?e;:=« there is a plea
in the plui:1Vf”-_’\iri§t1’ V ‘cfarizprombe deems in
O.5.No.2851′[19§9,.V vt11§:j__’4Vii.v_’is«’:.”épcn for tho plaintiffs to
argwiify Vi’r:c|V.a’.:i:I’i:~cvr,3…ttao subsequent amondmont af
thaf’1w§ipmmi§e;:V’Tfmm is new hgal impediment for the
plea alraady takan in the plain: by
adc;..i44§.::’gifi§_ Qédenm. If such an avidenca is pinned
I rugand to than amendment of cnmpmmise
F c5.s.no.2es111999 than than trial Ccurt mu
the am in acmrdancs with {ever even in the
{finance of specific pleading in this regard. Reserving
dwx.
55/” f
%%3uage
6
liborty in the psainrsrrs so sad widsms on me
arnandment, thh writ petition is hemby VV M
5bbl-
,m,fi§§Q 2%; §g§§§§§ “fig §$§3 X32; fifiqfiggfi am? Q39; Eagfi Egféiifiii aw? m£f§».§i%§. §§;§ ?.§ma..&g§a?a.§§3s .».§.y.,e.,.3§§ .,:.,i; :f;”_; g