Karnataka High Court
T V Shankar Narayana vs Smt Kempamma on 14 July, 2008
Author: Ravi Malimath
Bench: Ravi Malimath
22% 'THE mag COEERT 9? }{AR§'~fA"§'AK.& A? BANGALoV;RE§:"'»T.
DATED was THE 14% DAY {:9 JULY, :2<}93~~~~---- I
5.3.5.} THE HONBLE MR.JUS'}'£CE R$.vv1 §;1;2.Li'§4fi;';'3_': '- , BE'I'WE:EI'§ :
'§'.V.Shankar Narayazxa, S] 0. \«'en_ka'Tf:eshaiah Aged about 48 years, -- VA - } R,la'LN'0..11i3A, Vinayaka E;-s:t3:).'T,~ V ' Kewilegevszcia Nagam Opp. Ra$fi'tmihm2>i V" " _' Bangaiare-5§G'Q1§é,_ V , . . ,PESTIT1€)NER (BY S--":15. <35 5§ri i3§a'1:$I1€1ra D.V.GoWda, Advocates) W] <;v.iat€ 3*; v'¢n::e;:'es1a%a:ah, A fisgeci' :3bm1"£.79f' §?¢aI's, R,/at. f3a}1ind'E§andi ~ .. «, Mahankailamma Temple, " Bagzgaibfe-560 Q19. . . . F?ESP(}N'DENT This Writ P61313032 is flied uncier 331110135 226 312:} 22?' vfjfifi Constimtioriz sf Endia pragiiilg to quash 231$ carfier dated Mia--
WRIT PETITEON NQ8824 OF :iG0$"ۤM-C.,>Pv=:j.}' - = "
._2..
1$~4-2698, made an applicafisn flied by the umier Section 151. -::sfC1PC in O.S.No.?929/ 2006 on.&.tb;e_»f11;€-Qf '' XXII Additional City Civil Juéige, Baugaiere __--€ii},é,:
Annexure»E. This Writ Petition coming 01::
this day, the Omar: made E113 fol1owing;« . -T The petitioner seeks to tlatad 1:"':3--4~--iZ008 Vida A::nexu:~§§}":.?_ gag Eeafifid xxx: Additicinai City Civi1 __J}§;A€ig£;,.V._VV» City, in
0.s.:-:o.792§/20:36' 'ax; Section 15: :01" C¢P.C by V
2. I @"ounse1£o;~ tha petifisner and Perusfid flit': 0I:'E1€VI":
V. V,:3. ' V. :.'<:é;;:sc:ndttnt harem fried a suit in '%:g3:i11st her S011 anti other ciefsndsmfs far V V the yéifgjosfi éf Separate pcsssfissiczn and oiher raieifs. Dilfifig ..c:}u:"s.§:~ "sf the suit the rcsporifiezii.-pia§11tifi' flied an _'a_;«§piVica.;:i§:3sn under Seczticm 1%} Qf {X36 ':0 direct the ;3:=€tiii<)11:3:"- 13* Eiefendant £0 cieposit in the Court SC?"/E: of the rént which he Cofiects fmm the tsnants, The §I'Gpi:I"ti€:S have
5., .. 3 ..
been mortgaged for a sum of 'Rs.23,Z{0,0€){}/~ for each of the flO0I"$. N€3tWithsta:{1diI:g the 381116 the 1*' defendant has refused to makce 33:13: paymént to the Ifispfliidfiflt. V-The rsspondent herein being a mother who is aged years and can the failure cf the petitioner to 1003 M requizwementsfio survive out of the :rec:;'::i1:si;:;--f:'o1:?_; the trial Court has passed a c0nsi(iefé.:i Considtilafion all thfififii' facts anti» €};:ii%$§::i€d thfi 2. 5:_féfi1_:d'an£":to pay a sum of Rs.2,000[ per dd ":1o.i;A ffiicl any iilfirmity in the: order 110193;: Tthezje §aj.;y"'g1f01im"1 made out to mmfiaewfihfimégm§_V_*
4. For th€: ~vafbres:aici"v_rééigens, the Writ Petition bfiitig dev0i{:1_ i)f zgfraezits, is with 3. aiirection to the petitioner M ggbkf} ittsx». chkgz il:'f'iT5t3E;}g}'V§{3'v"f§'€S§3O£]€}CXH heraixx # sum caf Rs.12,0{)Q/- Wifhi'i§l f¥V0 _s>r;€éi:':~§ from the date {If receipt of this cmrder. Judge