High Court Karnataka High Court

Venkatalakshmamma vs Smt Gunasundari on 26 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Venkatalakshmamma vs Smt Gunasundari on 26 March, 2008
Author: H.G.Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED THE 26'!" SAY OF' MARCH 2008
BEF(}§E

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE    

WRIT PETITION N0 7514 012* 2696 (<3§§'¢%(:ri<3;

BETWEEN :

1

Smt Venkatalakshmamma, ‘ K ‘*~ >
Wife of Sri K. R. Ramaiah, L’
aged about 65 years;

daughtcrgdf Sri’i’?£;’l’R.V
aged about.-45 §i’f=ars5. .

Smt-LR Anustwa, % %
dallgfitef’ §)f’S_rf K’.’=,R’; Rs:.n1″a_iah,
aged abe_ut.43 3ze&r’s,_ ” ‘
residing a*£..DROPKE. N0 6,
Apgmmcnt 1″iQ,”12353,

,

r€;p1*:=:s(:ft1t¢=:d«..by PA Holder

R,’
daughter’ {if Sri K. R. Ramaiah,

agedajjout 40 years,

R. Indira,
A’-da’1ightcr of Sri K. R. Ramaiah,
H aged about 38 years,

6

Start. R.

daughter of Sri K. R. Ramaiah,

aged about 35 years,

all residing at No. P»-61/I3, 31″ Cross,

Srirampura, Nagappa Block,
Bangalore – 560021.

(By Sri V B Shivakumar, Advocaiii:)’ V

AND:

1

Smt:.Gunas1mdari, V _ _L ;
wife of Sri B. R. Dcvaraj,¥ _ V
aged about 43 ysam, « ” ”

I). Rajesh,__ 44 V __ ‘-
son of Sri .R§’_9D¢€é’a.*a§;:’.’j =
aged ”

Ms. I);..APco1’r;i1n~éi;-»., ‘ %
daughtcr cxf 8fl,B . Bciaraj,
agsd about 2.1 yitars, ”

19- Ra1mna,*~ %%%%% – .

ssgirz offizi B, R. Dcvaraj,

” all residiflg at

‘km 367,651 17th Cross,

_ V..’I~?,afiajiI1agw.’, 2.116 Stage, West Post,
” Bangalerc 56=€}{)55

7 ‘i–?etit_it;§r.jta3rs::vT_A

5 i-i.ESL’Ma3:1jm3ath,

son of Sri Muniyappa,

‘ag’éd’faBout 4′?’ years,’
residing at No.1298, 6″! Cross,
Namyanappa Lane, _ 4 _

I Byappanahédfi Vmagc, ”

Bangalom

6 R’. Ravi,
son of Sri N. Rajanna,
aged about 41

7 _ 31111:. G
“Wife efsri R. Ravi,” _ ‘
agw about .ycars,;

both residi};1g..a._t ‘i’€t_); IE3
5′-*1 Main Rgfiad, ” .4
Bgn@10x*c~5L’>QG03.’ A’ ”

(By Sfi Vijajyakt1mar.I{‘ f<5r._i?6""L8s R7)
'~ _ filed under Articles 226 of the

. .. Rcspondmts

fraying to praying to set aside" "the erder

pt. Apmo3,%mm O.S.N0.1O2O6/O5 under Annexe. passed

iixgg' 'E116 aforafiéfid suit upholding the ofiioe objections Iegaxtiizzag
the suit and direct the pet:it:ionm's to pay court fee

market value of the schedule site.