Sri. Ramaiah @ Ramappa vs Smt. Lakkamma on 6 March, 2012

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri. Ramaiah @ Ramappa vs Smt. Lakkamma on 6 March, 2012

-RNARD FERNANDEZ? 617, 4TH CROSS, IST MAIN, BHI Jane SHWARI NAGARA, BAN IGALORE 560032 SRI SUJA FERNANDEZ AGED 49 YEARS W/O ANTONY FERNANDEZ Ri AT NO.617, 4TH CROSS, IST MAIN, BHUVANESHWARI NAGARA, BANGALORE 560032 a SRI D VINOD AGED 50 YEARS 8/O DORAI SWAMY -- ar Rit \T NO.622, GOWTHAM COLLEGE ROAD i NAGAR POST BAN GALORE 560¢ 32. er:

SRIR DANDAPANI AGED 63 YEARS ~ :

R/AT NOY, KANAKANAGARA 'MAIN EO R T NA GAR Boat, _ BANGALORE E 560032." -

SFIP vee D 78 YEARS.

oe /O. PERUMAIAH =. 19.45, 6TH CROS:

STREET, VA! ASANTHANAGAR, as SANGALORE 52 33 swrPA .DMAVATHI OURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT GF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ad yu D 43 NEARS R/AT I NO 63, igi CROSS, MH GUURT UF KRARNAIAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COU MARUTHINAGAR, MADIWALA | BANGALORE 360038 .. RESPONDENTS (SRLM.S.BHAT, ADV. FOR C/R1 TO R6} (ABSENT) @ writ petition is filed under Artic the Constitution of India praying to aged, order , * , Civil and at i Anniexi ise-L) in the nature of certiorari quashing t the Sessions and ete.

cad ming on. for pretminary Hearing this day, the ¢ Co art made the. fe ali ow | :

os Though. thus' matter was. called, 'passed over and 'ec for the called for. the second: time, parties. However, then matter is oc considered on merit. a ve a A. , 3 28 . FS oy SS 8 bee ye SRS, AF .2003 on the file of the 43r¢ Add]. City Civil Jinige, Bangalore.

3. Plaintifis have filed a suit for partition and COURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT preliminary issue, plaintiff No.2 was examined as PW-1.

Wo <4 ---- - Sp woe ey | 4 cai ping, es ropefbvory ores ok ee 2 aie gk soe all or any of the suit echedule properties, if any, made by the defendants in favour of third parties not 4 3 profits and consequential injuncti 4, Defendants filed writteri, statement inter-aba ~ specifically contending that the have been alienated ten yeare prior to auit. Amongst other contentions, they elso contended that, in the eint-schedule properties layout was formed and sites havé beeri sold to third parties and the third parties have constructed, buikling and ae such, the euit este amok Se 8 ae = Seve 3 esentl ane Cia elena, "E145 abe, eould not have been valued under Section 35(1) of the 4 ae 2. Sx = f é ami Suits Valuation Act, Karnataka Court me Me = a , ms . os s a. Le ; 4 Lec enetde um - ash bmn accordingly, sought for treating the issue as regard to . me a . " ° is "the Court fee as the preliminary iseue. = issue No.13 ia aa r Fees paid is proper or not", it was treated as the 7% ® ha 2 € .* ; s . be pes ere p ae = :

binding on the pleintifie and for enquiry tow ards mesné. aloud oibsocl ay g © ; 9s } as % a a £ cay 8 a a L a & 3 a SA --_-- eo ¢ % 3 Ng seed jos a on a] feoky vein el =} a wy . i Ce eps 4 _ Ce as 3 ee _ an aon bs "

Tesd 4 3 eo a gg 4 9 g@ 8 ° joka te abs ae Lge a0 q Q del rng : os whe a "et a ie Suk i & " sa as pd eee by spot a a ay eet | "abot Ps dea Q 6 eu o ik

- y aoe -- Pl bly Be a3 7 ud et a & : wot id gst oo St a boo oe fa : 1D i oS Ss ml ee 7 » it ® - ew © & "

os ae , we a mn oad a age ° he > bed rc to the co i '6 : 'ud oo Os # é " q & e 5 *

- se q ag of 'a 8 % me " q a eo a iH & ~ te . «poe. a ae a : | ;

g ou 2 a8 oe a 3 a 3 SB og 8 y © Ra gg 'a SE § & 3s _ ' . * gagout . be : ae "Se ® og 4 4 ¢ g 2 Sg 8 BR Eb PF & 2 gs 3s «a a ak "2 Rg SC » & "S a by > ea ee i 'oe Q 2 * C a ae ; 2 Ff eo B® oe 4S ¢ Ag . q d ae Q = ne) _ + a Mg 'ee aq ag * falg ee ak a " - tx] ae a a et © OQ Bw wd. aoe a ee ee: et ts moo @ oh . g ® @ 4 & . = OB S Sees a G oo a sa 2 in wo CA Gl 8 .

el ha el ae ee -- @ a "$d ne" fC fi "> ' ' ' a _ a i. &, ;

c oe of. Go @ z & \. 3 ee ee:

aad :_ aia OB Pea © Oo By INOD HOIH WIVIVNYVH 40 LYNOD HOIH WIVLVNUVH JO LYNOD HOIH VIVLVNYVH 4O LYNOD HOIH WIVLVNUVN FO 2NOD HDIH WIVLVNUVS 40 LUNGS Ft fepugnee ed : order suffers from COURT OF KARNATAKAHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT a | tat bacl BA cue ted Ps par aed temple called Sri.Meenakshi Termple, ee FE at 5 ' est 4 A fee o) weit a ye Ex.D2 the market value of the land for the purpose of régistration within and around | 4 : trend C9 CE LE sh owagiien pang certied copy of the sale deed dated 24.5.1990 executed. 'in favour of defendant Ne.23, Ex.D4 the. ey x Sgr 3 property has is in the evidence that the land has 'lost the character of é wulture. The Trial-C Court, w without a into the docu uumerits Oy and | evides ne on though the | land: 8 situated :

conversion order. However, the 7 faker ints consideration.

appr dciation and cormideration of relevant material and : 2s henes, the © sane requires re-consideration. writ petition is part allowed. Order dated 16.6.2011 in O.8.No.9003/2003 on the fi 3 orisid Pe-e co o 1 fat Sy Lr | 5 vies oa a ;

Gad \ n "a 2 5, @ ~ aS 4 §

-_ pens ' i i. ay a4 om) | (OS oe . ie 6 he i s 4 ~ "ye ies oy (2, fe NOD HDSIH WIVLYNYV JO LYNOD HDIH VIVLVNUVN JO LYNOD HOIH WIVLYNYV JO LYNOD HOIH WIVLVNUYVH JO ino? HOI WIVIVNNYY AO DAA LU

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court