it HE HIGH COURT ‘F KARN AKA AT 4G C F DATED THiS THE 25 T DAY OF AUGUST, 201i BEF JR HON BLE MR JUSTICE HULUVADI GRAMESH RP NO 276 OF 2010 SETWFtN MT L S9MIaH1 P POOJFFY fl flC fl flfl oN’n. LJtML fl 01 SMI VASANTHI AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 010 LAtE SPIVPPP PO)JA Y P/OF S0XDRANE VILLAGE AND P021 VANALO I K OAKSH1NA KANNADA DISTRICT J2 SPI KOOSA PGtJAPy AGDABOUT6 YEARS V/OLA ES VAPPF O JA I R,AT RASIMOGARu iiL’ AIJE (ULP MN LPE 4L DARSHINA tANNADA L:cI T PiCt RFPPESENTE ) BY CPA HOL DER PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2 SI. PAVI OJA V tom RI MAHABA S DEAD (R3 N VP BEFORE JUGGMENT, A4D HIW FE SMT ‘AANTHI MAHPBAI 10 NOT ON RECORD HENCE NOT MADE RECORD BY LRS IN RP PETITIONER S (By Sri N.S. SATISH CHANDRA, ADVOOATE) AND SRI GANESHVSHETIY AGEDABOUT5I YEARS, 2 SRI. BHASKAR V SHETfl AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. T SMT. GEETHA V SHETTY AGE ABO T4 EARS SMT SULOCHANfrVSH T AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R1 TO 4 ARE CHI DREN OF LATE VABU SHETTY AND ARE RJAT ARYA SAMAJ ROAD, MAN ALORETO DK 3” ci 5. SMT. RAMA SM $ SHETTY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS W/0 LATE SUDNARA SHE1T( R/AT NO.61, HI FLOOR, II LANE KAMATIPURAM, M.R.ROAD. MUMBAI. 6. SRI. CHANDRAHASA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, Sf0 NARAYANA SHETTY, RIAT KARIMAR HOUSE, KUTHEHUR VILLAGE AND POST MANGALORE TALUK, D.K. 7. LAND TRI BUNAL MANGALOR E, BY ITS CHARIMAN 8. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY IT SECERTARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BU)LDING DR. B. R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGLAORE. “.4,, Review Petition filed uio 47 Ru1e’ t of CF.’.’, pray,ing for review of the Order dated 28-06-2010 passed in WP 18177/2004, on the file of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore. MIc.GvL166i&11forCPHnJllin.there:callin jçtion Misc. Cvi, 16618/Il filed u/s 5 of Limitation Act, prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 15 days in filing the recalling application, in the interest of justice and equity. M1CvL8339ti1forRtcallingiheOrder422 2 D22O11 Misctv[8339/i 1 filed u/s 151 of CPC prays that this Honble Court may be pleased to recall the orc.,er dt: 22.02.2011 in the above RP in the interest of justbe & equity. This RP along with Misc.Cvl. No.16618/li & 8339/11 is co 7 on for Orders this day, the Court made the following: -5- ORDER Misc, applications 16618/11 filed for condonation of delay of 15 days and 8339/li filed for re-calling the order dated 22M22O1 1, does not survive for consideration. Hence, dismissed. ScI/ JUDGE Ty. By: HN ft By: Q C. By: JN tøpy b (ig Cou of 00)