High Court Karnataka High Court

Yallawwa W/O Irappa Mantagal vs Sunanda @ Tayawwa W/O Mallikarjun … on 27 May, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Yallawwa W/O Irappa Mantagal vs Sunanda @ Tayawwa W/O Mallikarjun … on 27 May, 2009
Author: K.Ramanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA

CIRCUS' BENCH AT' DHARWAD  '

mcrga THIS THE 2???? my 0?   _ '

B§:mszE;__ A
HON' BLE MR. Ju;~:;T_1cE i<.fé}sMAN_a:£:..  "

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APP Ezs.i_; 'N{_3.9ߣ;4 (}F' 2595 (MW

BETWEEN :

SMT. YALLAWTh';?'n   g 
W/E) iRAPPA_.N1AN'§':3§_}AL«_ 

AGE: 59 YEA,_RS'i..  ' '   .,

ace: HV:3Us.Er;9L1§:WQE2.§{'--..

:2/0 KANIKA'I"i'§_--v   

TQ: SAUNDATTI *  '  " '-

DISTRICT; BELGAUM V.     APPELLANT

gm' ..fi§§iYUTHs "G 212: 'f'UR,AMURi FGR LAXMAN T

 "  MAEITAEEHKN  A1:)vsf;',';" '

AN"£';'¥.._     

7 zzimamm @ TAYAWWA

..  Wis MALLIKARJUN MAWAGAL
"=«s%GE: 31 YEARS
='0<::<;';: I--£OU$EHOL§ WORK
R/C}: I{AR{KA'f"i'I, TQ: SAUNDATTI
mS'I'RICT; BELGAUM




2. 'i'HE§ GENERAL MANAGER
K.S.F2.'I'.C. CENTRAL OFFICE
SHANTWAGAR, BANGALORE
THROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
D{VISiONAL C)?F'lCE

K.S.R.'£'.C., BELGAUM  REspoNp:g§:T$'  ~ _

(BY SRIYUWIS SANTGSH B MALAGOUDAI-'2, F0'ié_1:R-,1-A':"~éij =   

RAVI V HOSAMANI FOR R-2, A;:;vs.,;m .~ "

wars MFA FILED U/S 173(1) 01? A§av.,ACT--AGA;_Nm.
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARDV'«VD2'--x'I'ED: " ..19=/04]:209s'._
PASSED {H we N0.2280;,2oQ1 r31r~:"_'I'HE FILE:._()F _'TI'¥-IE *.
CIVIL JUDGE (SR.I)1'~E.) 85 MEMBER, AE'41AC*I',"vSA'!:JPi¥iZ)A'I"FI, '

AWARDING C{.)MPENSAT§C)N  _RS.4-,!}5,{)O0/g~ WITH
WTURE INTEREST Q2? 5% p..A;'v~.Am3 THE~--.APPELLAN'i'
HEREIN PRAYS T0 M0_1;):FY THE ABGVEVJUDGMENT AND
AWARD BY APPOR'rI'G%N:N:w:§;'v3'c":{<:::~a FGR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE comm': DE'I,IV'§§F%_Ei3__fl"I<{Efi mamwrm;

6:

 JUDGMENT

the matter is listed for admission, with

‘t::.§_;unI§;::2f1A3t :{:}i7 couusc} for the appefiant matter has

bێi2._ for fmai hearing. None appears on behalf cf

u ‘ ” ” — “tI;13 Lresigxaéidents.

The appeliant who has arrayed as mspcmient

V’ 35.2 in we No.228O of 2001 has come up with this appea;

1 Ci ..{7

chaflenging ihe judgement and awaxfl passed if-.y.

Saumziatti dated 29.4.2005 gmnting the

amount in favour of rwpondent No} he:1*ei.t’:”–¥’$1i1:aiicia,.Vw£fe” ”

of datctzased Mallikaxjun Mawagai. . 3 4′

3. The contention L’ ap§éE;i:’s.;iV1tI;_t : isgvffthat the
appeliant is none of cieceased.

Though award game tcwbé we mspondant
No.2 hertin $04/M togsther
with amount was orzieresi
to be {ha wife of the
deceagéfd. I ‘Seen granted in favour ef the

appeI_L*3u:t1; ‘ ‘§”hf: r¢’g:$vAt§r;»;?=V’~:§;m;;:~€;iisatic2i:1 V’

b€’€W€{‘:}1 the appekiant and resposf1’dé::1t« Néofiél b

as the appellant has already got *’}71:1s1*’Vc;-}:t “i:’)*i.’$,”_F_VV

do not find gocci grnunds V

order. Hence, appeal is dismi.*;sed’vaf 3:16 stagevaf admission.

Sd/ –

JUDGE