Karnataka High Court
Y Lakshmi Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 February, 2009
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
Bench: Ajit J Gunjal
_ TTI FHNZET COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAK
RT i
ea ae atk Se
Pe es Rung ar th Bert ners a Tre of UNS e
BAe
Bi Bh AB dt LE beho SYa Ae. Ld b
Bree bow a oe a ee 2
i. Sme.P, Lebel Reddy,
Wie ¥ Shivanencda. Reddy,
Aged about. 4a yOSrs
Hea rag ae No.6 669; 16% Main
ill Block K Korarnan:
Bangalore-560 0
. Reskling at Ho 3.1010, 2O0 Main,
IW PP Block, Jayanagar,
Bangalore-5 A) OF]
_ {By Sri.Gowtham and Rajeshwar, Adve
AND
l. The State of Karnataka,
Represented by its Principal 'Secretary,
Department of industries aC CO mmTence,
M.S. Building, D +E R.Ambedkar Road,
fy Pee
Benga lore- i BAD ON)
TEENS ESI ONG RERE SO RARRNATARA GIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH court
2. The Karnataka Industriel Ar teas
Development Board, 4 4242. a
No.14/ 3, Rashtrothana Pariah: a Bult
Nrupathunga Road » Bangalore-S60 (x) ms
epreaented by its Chief & baccutive OF ioer °
And Executive Member. mo
3. The Special Lane! Acquisinon % Officer,
\Air Port] Karnataka Ineustrieal Ar CB" .
Developmen ut Board, M. 3. 'Building, »
Peurya Industria! _ Area;
rac wealore- S60 Cy ach F
No.902, oe 'A we
2-4 Stage, West o Ec thor. read,
Bangalore-5 OOP ISB
o. Narnmatdke Udeog Mitra.
&4 Bloor, Khao mi Pheaver: (South Wirz),
_ No.49, Race Cour Se Read,
, Bangalore- SOO OO,
Representa. by its Maneging Carector,
6. State ewe a 1 Single Window
Letina Ne ao F Race Course Road,
- Bangelore- 1
'RESPONDENTS
2 & 3 by Sri. S.Manesh Advocate E-4 by Sunt.
- Kavitha, Advocate, R-5 ty Lexplexus, R-2 and R-d by P.Y.Chandrasheker, Advocate. Eel ari ReG by HM Keshawa Reddy AGA) a eo i aie :
ee ee ee ed "Tee TUNED GOUT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT on a "% : lonider wrticles. 226 and' 1297 oC BPAY IE to: "PG ins the wnicier © a ioe ma ! = COS eh petitioners ie sought When the matter is petuoners fies @ oucaie indicating that the netitioners do me -- " a _ . oe oh tas os + ;
Rot have any objection for the acquigition and they are "willing to-take the Necessary coripensation. Henoe, the petition doce not eurvive for consideration. 2, The memo ie taken on record. The mero is alse signed by the petitionera amd their counsel and the counsel identifies the signature of the petitioners.
3. Placing the said merno on record, the writ petition stearmis digrmssed as withdrawn. The possessicon of the y Pa