High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Narasingappa vs Krishnaji Ramacharya Managuli on 30 May, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri Narasingappa vs Krishnaji Ramacharya Managuli on 30 May, 2008
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar


3; ‘Z”B’..§:”; Ei§{.§H mzxm my Kfiflfifaiih arr BANQALGRE
mwzm *’§”2§IS T32 am my any MAY.

EEEPKIEE

$33Hawfinsafifiayfiaggmflansfiafifi&fi§Ufiafif *

mm.p fi§.13?:3§§:%* éaésfi _

£1 §a3a$:§§x?§A;’ _

~£a.AmfiAF?R’?AaAw§E§f Vn>
233 ?§ ¥EAR$,@§¢iPE§$EQEE§,_;
§ga.%ansaaa:°g§:;axwe, “*
zaazma REM %flfi3IE,* ‘ *

yéutm

EE£A?§§;, .

. . PITITIOEIR

{3y:§fi§;£ §g€§Ka$Ag S Efifia 3$$OC1R?E$ §

Efiififififigfi R£fi$fi§§RYfi-§fi&%$§&E
._ g$Eae7aLvEARs,uH’ ,
=A’€§@;E§fififiw$%§E§fiKR,
‘» E3:a?ug….’

. . . RESEWEIIT

‘ “Es; §riiH%R¥fiE§§R.E §E3H?A§§E, 33%;, FGR egg;

7é’l§.:E§ ?.3f$ 15 GE’ TPIE 939$ A$J~’*Js’§§S’I’

a} fag saamgaxw A33 macasa 3?§ 1a.2.aa EASSEB Ia RR
7 E’-=.¥;£’3.*s£.,T»’–“?»’.’.’t%*’: zikifif TE-5’5 FELE fifi ‘I’?-£3 HI REEL. DISTRICT

;”§»IM§?*§§; EEJ}3¢?5_?P;, 3.3%?-€ES§§2’§iE THE ?E§”{‘I’§’EC¥H ARI}

‘”= _§a§3:§£:§$ ?BE §B§§E%EfiT Am§ $35233 §?.1.:.9e
» ” SfiS§ES 3% RES Ea. kfiigé 3% TE FZLE 0? THE :1
REEL, CEZFIL «EESQE, {J2’~”:.§§«§}; EEJAPBR; .£*..Li.éZ!%§’TEP+§$ ‘I”é§E

…… . ………. lull nu-nu’:-|Ir\l\J”I mun ggaynl vr RRKNAIAISA HIUI-I COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA f-HGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 14355.] C

-um vc I-run’-1

. nu. – \u\a\.II\a n\r-u\|Iru.r’\nal”\ l’ll\J!’! \a\.4l’I-ill! vr l’\.P1,l\!’I\!.F|l\l-1 ruun MUUKI ur i\MKNAll-\I\.F\ 1-slur: LUUKI U!’ IKRKNAIAKA HIGH CLJUK?

vzrxwxoa zrznnn Ln-‘5 2’3′ (2:«(a’3 5 (L) OF’..1§K.4′ ‘ACT
1999. V

ms H..R.R.P. comm; on son AnnI’gsIQ:é”éifi.$

DEV, ‘;¥”£*IE CQUR?’ HABS THE E’GLLBIb’A;’VNG:-‘

mo peutionar 9 tn? A t ..-.

question. of which The
unm the old xR¢}’1:% Control
Act, 1951 undar 21(1) (c) (h) &

(p) or the into tin fioroe
of Kw Act), an petitbn is
oomnxtea;;:m: (;i1. [L] and (R) of the said
henrilzlg the parties have

the landlord has proved his

% gnxapartyiltx question am: that the

‘ 2 almrnazizive aeoommodamn and
passed the may of mm against the

W’

Hlurt UUURI OF KARNATAKA HIGH C;0’LjRT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C

1% fig; gm stagszsh, Sn: géayaknmar 8. Pat::’1,__ leaxfi

§. &€$ yrajm an khfi sf ‘éka mfifinmr

be gwfimi aamfi regmzzmbk time
fifi

§’%&r&§ §§& €.w§.3;3:*’.<: in $5 ':_1;;g.g;, J

jufitim wfii 33¢ mat; Ef $ia§"'vmar1'&s.'$;

wmaaia flue prem?mee»,,z

mm 12$ mafia-:-=

the pet,i.f:i.:¢:tm-

“5_fi’s’.’:tl’I”V}:’it:§f$ tiw m Imcaba the

gzzwkm, fi’§;{E2§j&i§’iI– 12:3 .

‘ ‘-« . V’ 3§:;:;2£ 5. £23; 4′

3d/’!*
I udgé