Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Defendent: shantharaju · Page 1 of about 216 results (0.110 seconds)

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

May 23 2005

A. Devegowda Vs. Puttanna and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : May-23-2005

Subject : Civil

Acts : Representation of The People Act, 1951 - Sections 81, 83, 83(1), 100(1), 101, 123 and 123(1); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 6, Rule 16; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 171

Reported in : 2005(6)KarLJ311

Advocate for Respondent : G.V. Shantharaju and ;H.N. Shashidhara, Advs. for Respondent No. 1, ;Deshraj and ;P. Changalaraya Reddy, Advs. for Respondent No. 9

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This election petition presented under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short, 'the Act'), by an unsuccessful candidate in the biennial elections held to elect a representative...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 13 1989

B.S. Muddappa and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Sep-13-1989

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 - Sections 2 and 19(4); City of Bangalore Imporvement Act, 1945 - Sections 23; Bangalore Corporation Act - Sections 3 and 71-A; Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act; Income-Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 10; Bangalore Development Authority (Amendment) Act, 1988; Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959; Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960

Reported in : AIR1990Kant87; ILR1989KAR3027; 1989(2)KarLJ540

Advocate for Respondent : G.V. Shantharaju, ;Shivaraj Patil and ;R.C. Castelino, Advs. and ;R.N. Narasimha Murthy, Advocate-General

ORDERChandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Order dated 4th January, 1989 of a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. No. 21344/1982. In the course of this order, we will refer to...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 27 1994

Nagareswara Setty Vs. Prabhakar Setty

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jul-27-1994

Subject : CivilArbitration

Acts : Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 41

Reported in : ILR1994KAR2826; 1994(4)KarLJ476

Advocate for Respondent : G.V. Shantharaju & Nanjunda Reddy for Kesvy & Co.

ORDERSadashiva, J1. This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 14-11-1993 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Hospet, on I.A.No. III in A.C.No. 2/92 directing the petitioner to pay or deposit a sum of Rs....

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Aug 23 1990

Telecom Employees Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Scheduled Cast ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-23-1990

Subject : Civil

Acts : Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 - Sections 14, 19(3), 37, 38 and 65; The Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1982; The Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Buildings under Self Financing Housing Scheme) Rules, 1982; The Bangalore Development Authority (Disposal of Corner Sites and Commercial Sites) Rules, 1984

Reported in : ILR1990KAR3320

Advocate for Respondent : S.R. Nayak, Govt. Adv., ;K. Gopala Hegde, Adv., ;Shivaram for Kesvy and Co., ;Rajagopal Naidu and ;B.K. Sampath Kumar, Advs. and ;A.N. Jayaram, Senior Adv. and ;B.V. Acharya, Adv. General;R.N. Narasim

S. Mohan, C.J.1. W.A.No. 1229/90. The facts leading to this appeal are as follows:(1) The first respondent Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Minority Communities and Backward Classes Improvement. Centre, Bangalore-26, (hereinafter referred to as the first-respondent-Society), filed...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 29 2007

K. Sathya Murthy Vs. the Secretary Ministry for Industry and Commerce ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-29-2007

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1949 - Sections 5; Patents Act, 1970; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005

Reported in : 2007(4)KarLJ686; 2007(4)KCCRSN260; 2007(3)AIRKarR40.

Advocate for Respondent : R. Muralidharan, ;Kumaran and ;Sagar, Advs., for R3, ;Aravind Kumar, ASQ for Rl, ;B. Papegowda, ACGSC, ;Ashok Haranahalli, CGSC, ;C. Shashikarantha, ACGSC for Rl, R2 and R4, ;G.V. Shantharaju, Sr. Cou

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. In response to the order and direction dated 3-11-2006 passed/issued by this Court calling upon the learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for respondent No. 1 - Government of India to respond to...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 01 2005

V. Gunda Reddy Vs. the Secretary Department of Revenue and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-01-2005

Subject : PropertyConstitution

Acts : Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 16(2); Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1961 - Sections 3F, 4, 4(1), 6, 6(1), 9, 10, 11, 12(2), 16, 16(1), 16(2) and 39; Land Acquisition (Mysore Extension Amendment) Act, 1961 - Sections 16(1)(2); Gujarath Town planning and Urban Development Act, 1976; Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 - Sections 79B and 109

Reported in : ILR2005KAR5692

Advocate for Respondent : R.K. Hatti, GP for Respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 5 and ;G.V. Shantharaju, Sr. Adv. for Shetty and Hegde Association for Respondent No. 4

ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. The petitioner in W.P. No. 33566/2004 is the owner of lands bearing Sy. Nos. 43/2 measuring 0-24 guntas, 44/1B measuring 1-00 acre and 46/2 measuring 1 acre 25 guntas. The petitioner in...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 10 1967

Ganjam Nagappa and Sons Vs. State of Mysore

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-10-1967

Subject : Sales Tax

Acts : Sales Tax Act - Sections 5(1) and 5(3)

Reported in : [1968]21STC188(Kar)

Advocate for Respondent : Shantharaju, Adv. for E.S. Venkataramiah, High Court Special Government Pleader

Somnath Iyer, J. 1. The question which arises in this revision petition is whether in respect of the turnover of the petitioner for the assessment year 1963-64 sales tax was payable under the proviso to section...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 28 2006

O. Leelavathi W/O Late D. Omprakash and ors. Vs. M. Neelakanta Naidu S ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-28-2006

Subject : Property

Acts : Limitation Act 1963 - Schedule - Article 59; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 1, Rule 10(2)

Reported in : ILR2006KAR4637; 2006(6)KarLJ617

Advocate for Respondent : Lakshmi Law Associates for R-1, ;Shantharaju, Sr. Adv. for Kesvy & Co. for R-3 to 5 in RFA No. 634/2001 and ;C.G. Gopalaswamy for R-1 and ;Shantharaju, Sr. Adv. for Kesvy & Co. for R-3 to 5 in

K.L. Manjunath, J.1. These four appeals are arising out of a common orders passed on issue Nos.7 to 9 and on maintainability of the suit. The appellants in these appeals were plaintiffs in O.S. Nos. 2045/97...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 24 2005

S. Shivanna Vs. the Special Tahsildar and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Oct-24-2005

Subject : Property

Acts : Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 - Sections 128, 135, 136(2) and 136(3); Constitution of India - Aticles 226 and 227; Transfer of Property Act, 1182 - Sections 1; Indian Registration Act, 1908 - Sections 129

Advocate for Respondent : Bharamagouda B. Goudar, High Court Government Pleader for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3,; G.V. Shantharaju, Sr. Adv.,; N.Y. Guruprakash, for Caveator-Respondent No. 4, ; G. Papi Reddy,; Krishna Reddy for Res

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Non-interference is the rule insofar as the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act'), for the purpose of mutating...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 1984

K. Venkatagirigowda and anr. Vs. Bangalore University, Bangalore and a ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-28-1984

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Karnataka State Universities Act, 1976 - Sections 25, 28(2), 37 and 38

Advocate for Respondent : G.V. Shantharaju, ;H. Subramanya Jois and ;V.A. Mohanrangam, Advs.

ORDER1. On a reference made by one of us (Puttaswamy. J). these cases were posted before us for disposal.2. As the questions that arise for determination in these cases are either common or interconnected, they can...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial