Judgment · High Court · 2011
Judgment
1.
- — C ‘ 9 ‘ A s DECFF. isis DATED: I (C62CX)8 PASSED iIF (3j’40135/2.0D2 hi C: C U >.. . C: V U U UCC: U (C: (U C:) 1)4) Tk ..D Cf s4. 4eSr rN54,t sn ‘‘:
0.
dS) 00 U ZU0 5:U I
I0.Jt the tc4!.ovsria: Three we.eks time is finai:[ g rsnte:ct tc comply sth t.he CUI% : sCnnc fsiUnn .‘.utcro)(tioo;, iMt000tlCUrl.flerreCOfl1)flC CC) CUEC curt. S. Em F), ‘‘U FT. Etis: ørm Cl) Sy: % L)EICC) : 2:-isiS! I DrstE5: IC S Aeam n twb Cowt or Kanz
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.
This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record.
Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on
Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status.
← Search more judgments