Sri M Doddaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 July, 2011
Author: B.V
sssaizti Eamii,
33, r§=:§_~§_-£3 Vpf":,s'§i'§'C':L.§_§.i{?;.}:1.""§?T§.2§FL§ raéiiszéai
éi2;2'::_'1C:e'vpf,§;.hi:é
{>§'f€:I1<:e£«3 zliiésgfid e1ge1i
PATIL ;-J. §i'eli'Ve'r.ed thje.Vpf'ol1,o'wir;g; '
.»,pfi»¢uauGMaNh ~~~~
is directed against
sétiiie'1iie1it~Vpf
we appeal out of (';our't. infirther waxfis, Vof
parties, the dispute i3.getfle£l}" t1ié
previsi0n:3 sf
Pr€vent:i0n__gf {§(gf:'Vu:Vpf;i0r; f~::;f{; fhat the act Q1063 neat
defame ihé
seeking transfer of Special
C.C.No.2/2001 which Wer€_:Vpf;ndlI1g.'befQI:éT'thé:
Additional Sessions ,.t}udge
punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the VPf:()hibidiVionV
Act and so also Section 498~A of IPC ,' Iria_{ri1f;gu'regard
BBMP pursuant V'
in the year 2007 and the reconiéifiiititien Vpf -;
Mahanagara Paiike into BBMP, 'neeeesitafeii the'
of improvement charges
Quart £§€T3[, 3-'c'.h33(iE3';§i'Vpf'é§§3*3'd1.EI'é1§ aspest