/ I: iN Xzth isi(zn (sU:2 OF A&jAsAxA AX LjAflJi jib. 16 si UAI Of’ JANU LI 1998 iLFO zUs Enk hisN t a,L Mu, JUcii’iCL I. BMASKAM ut LViNtf’ifla af’ 1. 14/s. Chitrakala Apartments Pvt. Ltd., NG-G8, 1°th Block, 8th Floor, I4anipal Centre, Diokenson ioad, Bangalore-46, rep. by its Direotot Prakash ttty, 2. Sri, Prakash hetty, Major, Lirector, 14/s. satitrakala Apartments Pvt, Ltd., ‘ Suprabha’ Saralebettu, Mariipal=57o £19. • • it chand a laik, V 0 or motor ç 1 P0 itiorer No 1) Ohitrak ala Apartment, NQs North iock, ManItsi centre, Dio1ensor H ani lore 6 •,P€t 100€ S• cSy Sri, Ramean P. Kulkarni, AQv.) 2- aND: 1, sri. K.G. Krishnamurthy, S/ Late Gopalaiah, 64 years, No.48/10, 13th Cross, 8th Main, Mall aes Larea, Bangalore-560 003. 2, Mr. fl Vasuceva Psi Director, N/s. hitraka1a Apartments Pvt. Ltd., NO.158, Marappa G 5 rden, An3anappa Block, Bangalore-560 6, 3. Mr. J. damesh, U. Pal, Father’s name not known to he plaintiff, Major, Chitrakal&, Manipale576 119. 4. Mr. âuo akar Psi, /o , Rameah Psi, Aged 45 years, B/o at ‘Chitrakala 4 , Manip 1—576 119. 5, Maharashta apex CorporatIon, iC ,iJa ti/ 5Oc, No.4 , Manipal entre, Jickenson Moad, Ban galore-46, .1 .. 2£ & 0 t Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section. 115 of CP.C. against the order dated 28—1997 pas sed in O.b. No.3519/1997 on the file of the VII ACdl. City Civil Judge, Bang alore, £his Civil Nevision Petition coming ox. for $mission this dày, the ourt made the following; £his is a revision filed by defendant assailing order of the court below givinc$he j dIrection for productIon of income-tax returns and other documents etc. Learned counsel contended that he has not filed written statement therefore question of documents said to be produced is releçvant or not is to he seen at. this stage. Plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of ount of interest from defts,l to 6, plaintIff L. has obtained order of attachment before judgement. ueit.a then application icr vacating attacnment order, Deft%4 contended that he had borrod P5,25/a lakhs and discharged the debts and therefore the documents sought for by the petitioner has no nO re]evarne • ‘ourt below after considering relevant matrial on record has ordered for ‘production of documents on l.A. filed calling for docwnts. I do tnt see any ground to interfere. ‘C.’ ‘S/ r i 4—I’ 0. ‘ .—. Hence, petition is dismissed. $d/e ‘tie t.by MR. 4 .bys( at Regiitpsr C :P Li it. .• - -: 3 .Ail 3 .1 *