High Court Karnataka High Court

Thayappa vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 28 January, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Thayappa vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 28 January, 2009
Author: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT 01:' KARNATAKA AT BANGA4L(§RE_}-V.Vv
DATED Tms THE 23%» DAY OF JANUARY_f j:   _
BEFORE % V'

THE HOMBLE. MR. JUSTICE A:.s:*{¥3d%?A\iv/N'A  

CIVIL REVISION PETI’FI_ON Nof_%417/cabs :2

BETWEEN :

1 THAYAPPA =
3/0 LATE MUNISHAMAPPA , ”

AGED ABOU’I’61YEA’F.’Sj- ”
R/ATE3ANASWADIVILLAG1E jV — ..
K R PURAM HOBLI. E3″”NGA1LOREj>SOLIT3}I ”
‘1’ALUK,BANGAI;ORE:43§ ”

REP BY ‘IfiI~.’?EI1a>;—ER .9 SHIVARAJA

2 DASARATH’i.._ ‘ ‘. A ”

S/o.LATE’MLrm::;HAi»§APPA

AGED AB'<3I;;T 59lYEiAF.'S_ _ «

1%/Hi' smasw 23:}: ' v_:1,1,-A (5.23:

K R PURAM riot-H,1'~..BANc3.ALoRE SOUTH
"1'ALUI,{3;?A s.:oi:£>ER P SHIVARAJA

P-‘SHIVARAKIA A ….. .. «

“S/0 ‘»I;ATE..PAPAIAH

. ‘ = 563$ ‘AB£}U*3’_ 47 YEAR’S
V [R;”A’3″*;5AieA:s_w.Ap: ViLLAGrir2

, R P’UF:AM~HC>BLI, BANGALORE SOUTH
A TALUK, EsAl’iGALORE2~43

14 P NARAYANA
sgo LATE PAPAIAH
V, * 2353.532 ABOUT 45 Yi%1:%£3S
_ . 16/2¢:’i’}3ANASWA1)I VILLAGE
K R PURAM HOBLL BANGALCJRE SOUTH

L

‘4

the slain; made. No doubt, it is a fact that the petitiep§er_fil¢gs

before the Execuf1n’ g Conn in earlier ‘

petitions were closed. Despite ggte ;t_h;eV ‘

Executing Court is required to agfiply fits 3 id

relating to the nature of the judgmefii*_aiid = L’

the instant case and as to W’Iv;Vie’ti;1e-r.VV ‘ea}1i§r eicecutizan
petitions were closed Execufion of the
judgment and deerxt-:e the petitioner
would be entitieILi*:_i:; the execution
petition Véiewn by the Hoxfble
Supreme” es well as Gurupreeth

Singifs evvase’ .1Z’£’.Vfi;’I’I’t3’d» ialgfidve ~ . 4 .=’

‘i3I1’e—–«u:it]:1er aspect of the matter which

is that the Hon’?;=1e Suprenze Chart has

«: Iegani to the power of the executing

V couI1:f$gse4′.or?der depending on the zmture of awazti

tovflthe interest can solafium, in the deeisien in the

jc.a’s*e”‘;:;f”‘;’s’oo1:> CORPORATION 01? INCIIA, KAKINADA vs.

‘T:

aside. The matter is remitted to the City

Bangalore city to restore the Ex. No.81?/02’_-‘énn’4ATi.é:”‘ ‘–é12:;’Z V’

reconsider the same in the light ofjlgc ohséivéfipfié’ ‘A u

above and the decisions zendened thej sgbgi-H: noiedV’ cE:%:s.éSL

A11 contentions are Iefi open. –

6. Accordingly, s’:a_13gA:i s~%c1isposed of. No

order as to costs.

7. répresented by their
respective” V1£3az1i}::d the3}”v”é§hafl appear before me
Executing’-_{.'<f31'_111 ofi the fimt date of appearance

and therea1;fer. thc_ Court shall regulate the

_ .. A A _____ -4 v

35/:

Iud§*’é’