Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- PACHHAPURE
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
Judgment
(by Sri./Snit: M.S. PURUSHOTHA A RAO, Advocate) . . . * PETITIONER AND: a) b) 5mb VerEkatamma, Since deeeasede Dv tins 5mb Javainma, D/ o Sri. Pnttamadaiab, W/o Sri. Chikka Thammai&, R./ at Kagepura, Kasaha Hebli., Minavalli TaInt Manidva District Sri. Boraiah, Aged about 54 years, S ‘ E/an Ragepura, Kasaba 1-lobli, Malavalli Taiuk. Maudva District. ‘‘ Ditt3 Madam,s N-i I Age 0. about 52 ‘ears, Sb Sri Putra Madaiah, P/at Kagepura, iKassba Hobli, Malavaili Taluk, ManC. a District. Sri. Puttaswarny, Pged about 50 years, S/o Sri. Pu.tta Madalah, P/at Kagepura, Kasaba Hobli, Malavaill Taiuk., Mándya District. Sri. Naganju, Aged ab.out 45 years, Sb Sri Putta Madaiah P/at Kagepura, Kasaba Hobli, Malavalli TaIük, Mandya District. Smt, Pathnamrna, Aged about 47 years, Wjo Sri. Thammanna, P/at Karkalli, C. A I lere Hobo, Madd.ur Think, Smt. Crowrrnrima. W/o Sri. Rajanna, Major. Pb at Neiamatcananalh, haracava’ Hobo, Malavath ‘[‘dut Mand..va, d) e) C) C)) RESPONDPJ7TS This Writ Petition is flied narter Articles 226 & 227 of the: Constitution of india praying to call 11w records in C) .S. Nd. 24/ 1999 on the file o the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Malavahi and MA. No, 14/2006 on the file of the (Dlvii Judge, Senior Division, Malavaili and M 4 ii ge Si D1tlslon, MahaaIli in M A. No, 14/2006 (AnnexureM) on the f1e of the Senior (Dlvii Judge, Malavalli “‘.3 Quash the order dated 17’. 08.2.0 1 1 use the sante. 0 ar t1r he ‘ nrc ‘N , 1 4 1 /2 aria also the order cttatee[ 21 12-2005 on. LA. No.1 in 0S. No. 24/ 1999 (Annt.xure-Fl) on tfe file of the Junior Civil Judge, Malsvai..il, N.estraining the in snondeni from mteifeung teae lid possc ssion and enjoirnent of hr su1 ‘s hrs ut 1nopetti ncnd’ng dtsoc sal of Ci S ‘io 24 / nn the file of the Civil. Judge, Senior Dlviskn, Malavalli. This W nt PetItion eonimg on for orders on tins day the court made: the ibliowing omen ORDER Two weeks time is granted to comply with the office objections, failing wmefl, lAze. petition stands ousinissed. TB5AMB di f3y : RRv:’ Sd/ AuDI)P & 4,
A. %4. .__, ,_#,‘ .4, •1 ¶14’ t a A, *zsén’ Pd1AflX tifl Coart anai*t44U uGL
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.