Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- JAWAD RAHIM
Provisions considered
Judgment
(By Sri. •SATHYA RAJ, ADVOCATE) AND ci MAtAPA ‘—‘ ‘4 Ill II Ii FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE r;rflTiflh) CPQ MA iflP 111* 4%€1’I* 1, * I 1** T m ,n r, PRESENT NOSSI, 5TH MAIN. 3 coss, $AM ;MAMTAMAA *1 *1%.E*fl* 4*1 4 irV *1 4 BANGALORE E3 HRRP flied under. )e /7 .RESPONDENT(S) j Agai.nst the Order dated: — c ‘— r F4A 4* 4 4* % I IL’, ,— I — LIL,j 4 4 c ,4 tn 44 1, *4* IJI 4’ 4 444 Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, dismissing the petition fliALd under Sec. 27(0(a) and (k) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999, V - This HRRP is coming on for Orders. this day, the Court made the following:. ORDER Office objection is not complied despite grant of time. rg g r z - fl ccw c - mc c nrcnrcri cc c icci nncnr’c ‘n nr mc tJ * %t needful failing which the petition shall stand rejected as being rr r cfcvcnac. r Ty. By: H•.M.N R. C. By: \ : 06/0712 C. Date :. Sdk JUDGE nib Court oç IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF APRIL. 2011 BEFORE HON’ BLE MR. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM HRRP NO 257 OF 2010 BEWVEE N.: SRLKENCHEGGVVDA, 5/0 RAMAN N AKG ONDA, AGED 31) YEARS, R/AT.N0A3, AN NASAN DRAPALYA, HAL POSL BANGALORE 560 047. (By Sri. GS. RAJESH, ADVATE) AND rc!. bMMMIUMtkr( 0/0. LATE RACHAPPA MUDf YtMi(b, R/AT.N017. DCDDAKPTAPPA ROAD, ULSOOR, BANGALORE 560008. v in ur&() RESPONDENT(S) HRRP filed unde.r cJfl%.. agofnst £W VITY the Order dated: 172010 pas:5 in K RC Nc.c 1 Q:9!412099 on the file of the. xv Aãdi.. Judge, Court. of Small Causes., Mayohai:i Unit, Bangalore, allowing the petftion filed under Sec27(2)a) & (r) of KOrna aka Rent Act 1999. Thh HRRP is coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following: ORDER Counsel absent. Despite grant of time, office objection has not been oecrphed. Kmaeve.r, a rek’s tirre is..: granted to co:m.piy with the office objection faleing wiuich the petition shali stand rejected as being defective without further reference to Court. Sd/S JUDGE Ty. By: HJvILN Ft By: 4! By: :612/12 : Sigh Court of KarnatJak’ ga1ore46OO0
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.