Karnataka High Court
Raheemuddin Ali Khan vs Nasrulla Khan, on 13 January, 2009
Author: H.G.Ramesh
Bench: H.G.Ramesh
rs uvunl vr fiflxlfiifllflllfi Hififl C0951}-< OF KARNAT Hi ' - _: AKA GI'! COURT 01''' Kid!
4. NQTAKA HIGH COURT OF KRRNATAKA !'HGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CPU?
W}. 7 1!! ms maxi mum axe' % cmcurr amen AT % * ' V nxmn mas ms 1375 »mfiEA% mm uownm W.P..'¥E9.4G2""' BETWEEN: Rahccmugicfifia
S] 0 }§ydc1'.I{ha;r1, Age: 66 " 4- Occ:
R/<5 "H.--N;5'.;5~1G;:1V;A;._ Ri?Za(B}, fi?3r.$BFls« . -
Gzifiaaxga. _ ' ' (By §i'i--.1:§54.;?K.4fa_gi1:1étf;¥*§dV.) '-- Khan 3/as Hyde: Khan, " 65 yaars Ceca Marx name, V» * s Hospital, "($2/o H.No.S-101, A "Ro2am;, Guzharga.
{By 311 v.G.s:mm fer c; R) ..PE'I'I'I'IONER . . RESPOEDENT 8 "'" ' """""""¥-'g_'-"' """\I'HH-In:-5 ntun \..UUKl ur IRA it _: xunamux 1-new couar or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA I-HGH qoui W. No. 79 00 consideration of the matter, both the rejected the yrayer for tempqgfaxy If relevant to refer to the foflowing f the lower Appellate ......... .. On ' not proved his lawfixl disputed open as sketch in 'B' all the to W: hardship and passed brdér. Vbiif all the necessary mgfédfiénté' under Order 39 Ruiz-: 1 __§ dm'.1 2 therefore the same cannot be _____
3. the matter in the light of the ' "p§iii;ac__ip1es 1aid__iiown by the Hoxfble Supreme Court in v. mu cmmsa mu (AIR 2003 so to exercise of jurisdiction under Articles 32:'2»6,. .'& 227 of the Constitution of India pertaining to cc-urea 'curtain: may nu-|I\lIr\lfl'\|v~\ 1'1|\;rI \..\.I|JNl 'Jr I\f\KE'lI'\i:AKA W.P.No.40279f2008 iI1ter}o<mto1y orders passed by ate the High Court.
4. In my opiI1ioI1, fghe V' suffer from any error ofegeparent en the face of the under the extraordinagy under Articles 226 85 227 "i'-Eiidia, Sd/_ JUDGE eeeee