This judgment is a barely legible order of the Karnataka High Court Lok Adalat involving a conciliatory disposition of a miscellaneous appeal. The text is primarily illegible, containing no extractable legal reasoning, parties, or specific relief details.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE BANGAI ORE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATFD THIS THY 14” DAY OF AUGUST, 2012
CON CILIATORS PRESENT
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE U VSHYLENDRA KUMAR SRI MU POONAUHA MEMBER AND
Between
Miscellaneous First Appeal No2983j2010 Lok Adalat No511/2012
C, 1’ ‘ v’ : i U ‘UI 1 U (\‘ I ‘! Li< iiidi’ Cj Cl 11CR iN)cx 2 Rti i Ii.”.. \uru iii \ ft (I S Cl H 1 iI
(By SriGMChaudrashekar Advocate)
A
Appellant
ri.:
Rspondents
• i Ikcj It ii fir ad. f)€ anc’c-ie
(By S’i. D S S’jdh’r Advo’ ate f0r PAl)
( )%il( (Y\
•i \ ‘l’”:;!S •‘: ii’
I “C\ ‘a1 •1 V J .1 I ) !s(
‘ t ( I: i.
rjr•i.; ik ‘MJ J’(’N’ tat’ 4._i 1St ‘ . 2’fll R.SE ‘i pr ‘! 4 _flV I I niTit ,‘ k)\ S • fl\ i tt II 3 •) (1 • :‘ if ,‘S’Ill’ iP1i 3’, fl ‘1’ Ii: ‘t_ti I f. T Jib ‘) jIS \‘i•\i ‘ . • .1 •
?j• ‘fl
.1 z: a’’ i ‘ ‘ ?ii’z ,v’ ‘ —. 4.
CONCILIATION ORDER
• , haiti pu %ttIIrn1c iii Ix i’vc (El ‘(‘Lu vl • lbt ‘air 0) :ipp—.iI hoc ut en ‘ v’ twit •
t 4tIoiii1L Iii’ 1
1 ira 1. ipptlh in Ueiii. 1l4at 1911(Iihl(,f ‘10 ti ‘‘i1rii (‘aIi%1rl[Jrh’lYV n çn rid t1.i’ iid till• ,, 1 i an h the j’aities
• eferred to LA s,cldIaI I’r t I ‘dciii ‘SI nw1’ irt -a Inot ) urn •tbl )c rs ,n Iv, lui4 I n ‘Ii a
1w nj, tnjtircv] :
‘ I I I J •, )1 ‘ I ‘1 ‘ I ‘ 1 ‘a j) 1 1 c ii ,i,I ‘ 1 1 I ii’ S 1 1). ‘ ‘ 1. •i a , • ( I t%•I II ‘1 I ii C I t I 1 C S a 1 4.J 1
— 1: It’ 1. ip— ...1:jJ . ‘I a ; I It tin ;l ii ,: I ) ‘‘ iii IC Jui’at ?rk’nio 1 ii p t.J1t 4. Rtip.’ s ILu ‘ I IlV ::lt rn’ i 1 till Ii ‘•‘ ‘r,tir u’ -‘K’t i’nu ‘h’ R ‘ I’ IW:t ‘ Ii Fat ‘‘ ted 1 - Ii I u: -I v aim %dil na’l( !tflI Cci iv Jt’L tat’ ‘nit :Ii .j Icy flit. r ,j)t fl’J( Pt ‘ liT) Ii 1 ft tidp i tnt Tt Ii’t iii j (e it dI(lt u’ liii i’ I •j ‘ ‘ veiti.’1. Si’ - .1 1 T jil ti Ct)lt’flI”i% at •‘• cfl’.lliIt J t t’i( .l ‘It1T (i ‘rt1t lkk C LI 1)1111% eu itit ‘I4 tstdrt • i i’ C”’. shnll Itt) ‘iii the ri tilt’ 11j’ tjiffirenrt I ei’n tilt’ I)aiIit ‘i s:O I jihi” 1 iii fj. ‘liii H it .0 dli Ii ‘ni nh ii t tin pu Ic— %I at’ .94 16) TI - it It tr-i th - - •‘ us Itc •1 rrti Ip t%[ ‘id nt I I I1hi4I I ill’ ‘ill i_ %i) 00 fix Iho i%.ui.1 ç.;t, flu Ii- a’ %‘t I I I I —n ‘ci cOlt 1% 1 Ic ‘1 i ii’ I )J I - ‘1 .i j ts 1 - I. 1
K I.
till
Unknown
Unknown
U V Shyendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
