High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri T N Puttaswamy S/O Late … vs Smt Nirmala Devi Uruf Nirmala … on 17 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri T N Puttaswamy S/O Late … vs Smt Nirmala Devi Uruf Nirmala … on 17 June, 2009
Author: K.L.Manjunath And C.R.Kumaraswamy
IN THE HIGH comm 0? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
SATED THIS "me 17*" DAY OF' JUNE 2009

PRESENT

THE i-i0N"BLE MR..JUST¥CE K.:_. MA¥%£}UNATHt. j' E 

Am   

ms Homaze MRJUSTICE (LR. s<us¢A%§,ASwTA:*a%Y%A%%%   
R.EG£JLAR FIRST AWEAL m%f<3,17o2x2oo7%Tj   

§m 

1

SR: *2" N PUTTASWAMY
s/0 LATE NANJAPPA   A
AGES Aaom 58 YEARS   .  '

Sm GA%*;§Ti~éR:   % _   ' -
wig sax "rim PUTETEASWAMY   
Acgaga ABCUE" 42%vE,cx:-zs'- ' _  '

xumgaz .9usHézuz§$Ts+z;v'*
go V331 TN PUTTASWAMY ,

 *  §3xGE$} ;i:a<;:_n* 23 VEARS" ----- 
 :e;af'£;--p s:;:\;::::as";.*2r$"'» ..

'-s,Ié::r;_Ts2.z I,rw't..-*r:=,:s$wAMv
Aé13E§}_ABOi3T'j2..1 :<EARs

KUMARI P;;iVx'-:',1¥iRA

_ 4  DIS $RI.. T ?~§_ PUTTASWAMY
"  "AGES A$£Z3%.}'E' 19 YEARS

"=}7ap9ELLaNTs 1 TO 5 ARE

  R11=;s1:.:»=ENTs 3:: No.134;2,
 IILMAIN ROAD

%   ..C::.--.:AMARA3PET

" BANGALORE - 55:3 915.

WAPPELLANTS

x {BY M/S: T N ARAKESWARA S: ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATTES}



AND:

SMT NIRMALQ DEVI URLIF

NIRMAIA KUMARI

WI!) HEEERACHAND

11650 finBOLE'3' 46 YEARS

NCL42/1, III FLGOR

M.P-'!-LANE, CSANIGARPET

NAGARTHARAPET CROSS    ' 4
BANGALORE -- 566 002. J,.fi,.RESP0f'£'DENTAT f: » V'

(BY SRIYUTHS: R 8 SADASIVAPPA,
MCJHAN KUMAR T, ADVCICATES)

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILEi3._UNDE'R SECTICVN 9v5"§i;.'§.0af}
WITH QRBER XL} RULE 1 OF CODE OF CiVI'E.,, PROCEDURE AGEINST THE
JUDGMENT N40 £)ECR£E DATED 4.4.2607 PA$':'5_EE'5--IN 0.S;NO,5182}1999
()N THE FILE OF THE 117" ADCSL. CYfY~"CEVIi.- 3'i;*.DGE, BM-iGfixLORE,
DEGREE-SING THE SUET FOR SPECIFIC"P.ERFi3RMANC_E;._ 

THIS RE*suLAR-.F:é::s':.APF'FAL :<':$:*arv::'r}.ti3 03x: FQR 0202325 BEFQRE

THE caum" mzsv --. Dji:-Y, i:.'L.M.!aN3uuA'rfi.' 1., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:--  _      . g

 

The parties  fife-éi the éfimpmmise petiticm. It is signed
bfitiie, aas wgtl a5' étfiéifvacivocates. The parties admit the

exet:;,nt'i432*s<   petition. They have been identified

 the téaffiéd  for recpmtive parties. The {espondentg in

 7f;sl§ and finaii séitfefiient cf her ciaim, has agreed to receive a sum

.1  iakhs ffam the appeilants and the appeliants have ag reed

  2;"-fiafbresaid sum of Rs.13 iakhs on or before August 2009,

 fai§:§_fa'g"vwhich the respondent is entitied to claim interest at 18%

“émnum from 1.9.2609 titi the date of realisation. The

(K/,

3

respondent has no objection far the appeflants to ”

original documents prwucect by her in the trial Court. H

it is open for the respondent to take back-‘she »c*rigi:§.=.zl

and hané over tlm same to the appellants :7:

appellants can make an appliwtion V-ttjiai. .!:§*.€–:
original documents, in View of the comp;t$mtse..a_:rivtéd’~
In the resuit, the Appeal’ ‘i5″allcrv;*<é:*J. and

decree of the trial Coast' fig htffeby' mo«qifigdV__by 'balding that the

-respondent, who is the tffiall is entitled for

a sum of Rs.1.3__ lavlttzs.Vé;méZ_; entitled to claim
interest at 28% per ttttttéxrrfz of Rs.13 lakhs is not paid
on or befosre the Registry is directed to
draw the .’l’artiesTto bear their costs.

Sd/-as

Sdfsé
fudgg