Sri. P. V. Narasaiah Sb. Narasimhulu, v. Sri. S. Honnaiah Sb. S. Sunkappa,
Case Details
Summary
A structured summary for this judgment hasn’t been prepared yet. The full text is below.
Precedent status
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.
Original judgment text
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29H! DAY OF AUGUST. 2011 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE B.V.PINTO CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.500/2006 BETWEEN: Sri. P. V. Narasaiah Sb. Narasimhulu Major. R/o. Cowl Bazaar Bdllan (By Sri. R. B. Deshpnnde. Mv.) AND: Sri. S. Honnaiah Sb. S. Sunkappa Major, Land-Lord cum Lorry owner RIo. 0. No.130, W.P.No.18 Sir M. V. Nagar, 4th Cross (Right side) Kappagal Road, BeIlan 583 103. (B’ H. Mallan Goud. Mv.) APPELLANT RESPONDENT This criminal appeal is filed under Section 378(4) Cr.RC. praying to set aside the judgment and order of acquittal dt.26.12.2005 passed b the Addi. C.J.(Jr.Dn.i & .JMFC. Bellarv. in C.C.No.2275/2003. acquitting the respondent — accused for the offence p/u’s 138 of N.J. Act. a r C * — H C r r C - ) C C I m e r C 1 3 m e O G 4 O G C ) - n e O G - n E e ? 4 4 4 4 O G r C n O G ) Q C - n e - ) O G ‘ O G 3 : ? 2 O G ‘ m e r C — O G r C + - O G O G : n e . . l e ‘ 1 4 ‘ I r C ? 2 L C r O G ? F C O G O G C C ( m C ‘ f ? 2 r 2 C r C O G O G r H C r C . r H C : 4 4 r C t F L l i [ ? 2 — O G . C [ L C n e O G O G C C 1 : 2 o m ? 2 — 2 O G L C r C r C r C C C - C C O G — — n e - ) ? C2 I r C O G - r J ‘ n e O G O G r C r ) C z C O G . ? F n - m e r m + C m e O G O G - - 4 - : L C C C 3 : O G t - r C 2 O G J ‘ m e O G C N ) N . C C C N 0 0 ) ’ C r n e 3 : n e C O G o n C e r O G O G C ) C m e m O OG G n - : 2 O G e r n e — - ? 2 ? 2 O G ? 2 m e r : 2 : 2 1 _ 4 ’ O G r C n e . 2 4 n e C I ? F O G — O G ) C O G O G m e ) N H r C O G O G m e - O —G m e : t : - - n e r C — m e — J - m e r C O G r C 1 “ “ — O G O G — 2 + — C C O G n e O G n e — — O G : l f O G C ÷ - m e j - i N C C O G : H n e [ . . ? 2 • ‘ \ 0 m — e “ H r C O G — ’ ‘ O “ G n e n e O G O G : 2 m e i C < O G L C . C I O G O G r O G C L C m e r O G O G . O G n e C1 r C m e O G O G n e “ O G r r r C O - G , • O G 1 m e r C O G ) 1 ( 4 C - i - ‘ m 4 ) e r m e r C O G m e O C 4 - ‘ ” - C - ) n e m e O G n e ) C “ ’ O G O G m e O G — O G r O G C . O G O G m r C C i C ; C C O G ? F O G C ) - ‘ - ) O G m e r O G ? • 2 O G O — G O G m e r C O — G O G m e t • z L C O G s C L C O G i I m m O G — m e . — ? 2 m e r C ? 2 0 t F — H - O G - ? 2 O G m e - “ O G . C ? 2 2 m _ > 1 3 m e ) C m e r ) C O G 3 : — — O G m e — % S C m C r n e r ) C C — S C “ r ’ ” r m e m e ” t i r C ) C m e ) O G m e ) C [ 1 3 : 4 “ ) C C “ - — m e : m e 3 : O G O G • t t . 1 3 = O G m C r C — O G 4 3 — O G O G r r r C O G O G m e r m e r — m e 1 3 J \ r J ( t . C O G nC e - ? 2 e m O G — ; m e O G C r c m e 3 : m e O G t I - 3 : - O G n e - O G O G : 2 m e O G — O G O G • O G O G O G ? 2 ) C m r . O G m e — O G n — 1 ‘ r o ? 2 % ; 4 ? 2 m e 1 3 m e — + - e m * -3-
3. 1 have gone through the contents of the letter dated 27.01.2011 also the signatures therein. 1 am satisfied that the matter has been settled between the panics.