✦ Karnataka High Court · 29 Nov 2011

Ganesh Rao 5/0 Nagesh Rao Varagiri v. Malatesh sb Fakirappa Hoolikatü & Ors.

Case Details Karnataka High Court · 29 Nov 2011
Court
Karnataka High Court
Decided
29 Nov 2011
Bench
—
Length
1,042 words

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.

Why is this linked?

Original judgment text

Judgment

1. Malatesh sb Fakirappa Hoolikatü, Age: Major, 0cc.: Business, Rio Deraragodda village in Ranebennur Taluk, Haven District.

2. The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. ltd., Shamanur Building, Chamarajpet, Bangalore. - Appcllani [By Shni M.K. Soudagar, Advocate for R2) - Respondents This appeal is flied under Section 173 (1) of M.V. Act against the judgment and award dated 06.01.2007 passed in M.V.C. No. 65/2O02 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & Pd. JMFC & Addl. MACT, Ranebennur. H E — i c z & O J * 2 1 C * j . i - R i c _ ) l ) i c _ _ 4 4 . . . . a P L C — * . : l f — C C 0 4 H2 P P : 9 H - P C C H 2 - ) ) N N 2 i D C O C H . D C D C — r D C i c — - C i i c , H — ) 4 4 - r 1 - — . — . C C 0 i c - c — i c i c ) N i c D C ( ? C D C I - 2 . D C ? - C 0 . . D - C - C 0 0 - C i c - o H C C C - - C : - 4 4 H 0 D C * . . _ : - . i c i — c ) N H H H . ? C D C i c N c c i c H H n H — - C 2 C o 2 H ) N H H D C , . P . 9 D C n D C D C ) C D C i 5 - H D C c ) N D C - D C D C t r D C i c i c t i H D C 9 a D C 2 D C i c D C D C ) l ) C N a D C D C D C ) C H o D C — D C H D C ) C ) l C D C 2 D C i c - t ) C i c D C i r ) l — C D C i i c - D C ) C D C D C 5 D C D C D C 0 : c C r i — D C i r 9 D C — — P i c i — c o H H H 0 D C D C 2 D C i c D C — — . H H D C - C C — F 2 i c D C 2 i r H u c 0 H . D C C ) C — H ) N i - a C i c D C 4 2 H H D C P _ ) N i c 1 C D C D C P D C , — ) l C ) l C D C . i c H H D C ) N D C — D C ) l C D C H D C D C t i D C t i D C C p F i D C - D C C — c c H D C D C - D C — — D C D C ) l C i c D C D C D C i 4 2 r H H D C t D C C D C 0 p 2 ) 4 - D C D C 0 9 2 0 9 5 H H 0 D C i O H 2 D C i c D C H D C D C D C D C . p o P P — H o n D C — c c D C D C — D C D C 2 D C F 4 2 _ H ‘ ° — c B a 9 P H . t F ) D C 0 “ D C H 9 H D C H . 2 D C 0 4 5 ç D C — H H — H D C H Z D C s H t F t F ) C n ( t F D C 2 $ . z t F H H D C H D C 2 / “ ” D C t C : 2 H d C — D C D C C C D C H H - o 1 “ D C t r - 2 B D C 9 D C : 1 “ H H H H B 2 D C d C H D C D C D C H D C P ‘ - “ 2 D C C C D C H 0 d C B B 0 d C d C H H D C C C H D C - B p 0 H o H D C P t F — D C t E H - H H ‘ ° D C “ t F D C d C H D C H 0 H D C 2 / “ 0 — d C D C B 9 2 H D C B D C B P D C D C H 0 H D C H H 2 / D C d C D C , — 2 / ( B - - 2 t F H D C p P Ft H D C H D C 2 B H _ D : C H 9 ( d t L Z £ 1 — ‘ H i c . e H t F

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