Karnataka Dharwad Court January 2011 Judgments

Vahannappa Ningappa Boli and Others Vs. Mahalingappa Mahadevappa Boli ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Abdul Nazeer, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in R.A.No.39/2002 dated 22.12.2009 on the file of the Fast Track Court-II, Dharwad, whereby the judgment and decree in O.S.No.80/1977 dated 25.9.2002 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) at Hubli has been set aside. The appellants were the defendants in the suit and the respondents were the plaintiffs. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their respective ranking before the Trial Court. 2. The plaintiffs filed the above suit for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The genealogical tree of the family is as under: Neelappa Havalappa Boli (Dead)Ningappa (Dead)             Basavanneppa                                   &nb...

The Deputy Commissioner, Uttara Kannada, Karwar and Others Vs. Venkatr ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Reported in: 2012(3)KCCR1971

(Prayer: This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in the writ petition no. 13975/2005 dated 22.02.2007.) 1. The appellants have assailed the correctness of the order dated 22.02.2007 passed in W.P. No. 13975/2005 by the learned Single Judge, wherein the respondent herein had assailed the correctness of order dated 28.02.2005 passed in RB/LND-II/AP/CR-3/04-05 and order dated 30.03.2000 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Sirsi Sub-Division Sirsi. 2. The brief facts of the case are: The respondent herein claiming to be a well qualified M.SC. graduate filed Form NO. 50 under Rule 108 for regularization of unauthorized cultivation of land measuring 3.00 acres of Margundi Village of Sirsi Taluk. On 09.07.1991 pursuant to the application filed by the respondent herein and after verifying the contents of the prescribed form filed by the respondent, the third appellant submitted his report to the Committee for Regularizat...

Andanagoudar Vs. the Management of N.W.K.R.T.C, Divisional Office by I ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Venugopala Gowda, J The matter is on Board, to hear regarding non compliance of office objection. The office raised objection with regard to the maintainability of this review petition. Learned Counsel for the petitioner having endorsed on the Form of Examination Report (Form No.14) to the effect that “Under Order 47 Rule 1, there is no prohibition for second review and may be posted before the Court.”, the matter has been placed before us. 2. It is necessary to notice in brief, the facts of the case, which have led to the filing of this review petition: The petitioner/workman remained absent from duty while working on the post of Junior Assistant with the respondent/management from 18.7.86 to 30.10.86 i.e., for about 102 days. Management issued ‘Articles of Charges’ on 21.8.87 alleging that, the absence was unauthorised and amounted to misconduct, to which, the workman submitted his reply. The explanation offered by the workman having been found to be not satis...

Kiran Vs. Anand and Others

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Reported in: 2011ILR(Kar)623; 2011(6)KantLJ558; 2012CrLJ590

Heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the Learned Counsel for the respondent. 2. The petitioner was a complainant who had initiated proceedings under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against the respondent herein. The proceedings were contested by the respondents. The Court below, on the allegation of the complainant that the complainant-petitioner had business transactions with the respondents, who were a partnership firm engaged in dealing with tarpaulins and that the respondent herein had approached him for a loan and it was granted to him. On default of payment, a demand was made by the petitioner and in consideration of discharge of the loan, the respondent herein had issued a cheque for Rs.50,000/- dated 30.6.2001. The said cheque, when presented to the Banker of the petitioner, the same was returned on 31.12.2001 with an endorsement by the Banker of the respondent as follows: `r...

M/S. Kamangar and Company Vs. M/S. A.L. Byahatti and Sons and Others

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Reported in: 2011ILR(Kar)1576

VENUGOPALA GOWDA, J 1. Plaintiff is the appellant. The suit was filed for recovery of money. 1st defendant is a registered partnership firm constituted by defendants 2-4, under Ex.D-8. The firm was carrying on business in produces like onions, garlic etc. the 3rd defendant, representing the 1st defendant, purchased onions from the plaintiff between 08.11.1999 to 10.01.2000, to the tune of Rs.5,26,336.58 and paid Rs.3,02,737/- and retained the balance of Rs.2,23,599.58. A cheque dated 24.01.2000 for Rs.25,000/- (Ex.P-5) was issued towards payment of part of the outstanding amount. The cheque was returned unhonoured (Ex.P-6). A legal notice as per Ex.P-7 was sent, which was served on defendants 1 and 2 (Ex.P-7(a) and Ex.P-7(b)). The notices sent to defendants 3 and 4 were returned (Ex.P-7(c) to (f)). Suit for recovery of Rs.2,23,599.58 was instituted. Defendants 1, 2 and 4 appeared through their Learned Counsel. 2nd defendant filed the written statement, which was adopted by defendants 1...

Karnataka State Financial Corporation Represented by Its Branch Manage ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under article 226 and 227 of Constitution of India. It is prayed that this Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to 1) issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order of the Hon’ble Court below dated 18.4.2006 on I.A.No.1 filed by the petitioner under 0.XXXVIII Rules 5 of C.P.C. in Misc. Petition No.10/2004 vide Annexure-E and order dated 1.2.2007 on the I.A.No.V, filed by the Petitioner under 0.XXXIX R.1 and 2 in Misc. Petition No.10/2004 vide Annexure-G, and to further allow the said applications. 2) Grant such other relief’s as are deemed fit and necessary under the circumstances of the case including the cost of this writ petition.) 1. This writ petition is by the Karnataka State Financial Corporation (hereinafter it is referred to as Corporation for the sake of brevity) seeking quashing of the orders dated 18.04.2006 passed on I.A.Nos.2 and 5 respectively in Miscellaneous Petition No.10/2004 by the District and ...

Ninganagouda Vs. Kalubai and Others

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Reported in: 2011ILR(Kar)760

Plaintiff is in appeal questioning the correctness and legality of the judgment and decree passed in R.A.No.45/2009 by the III Additional District Judge, Dharwad dated 31/08/2010. The parties are referred to as per their rank before the Trial Court. 2. Brief facts of the case leading to filing of this appeal are as under: Appellant instituted a suit in O.S.No.150/2008 on the file of III Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Dharwad for the relief of declaration and consequential relief of perpetual injunction in respect of suit property. It was contended, in the suit that plaintiff has become absolute owner in possession of suit property on the strength of an unregistered sale deed executed by the father of the defendant namely late Sri. Anantappa Mahadevappa Mulagund on 05.09.1971 and when the plaintiff sought for change of his name in the revenue records pursuant to earlier representation which had not been done by the Tahsildar inspite of representation given, Tahasildar gave the endorsem...

G. Mallikarjuna Vs. G. Thippamma

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Venugopala Gowda, J Alleging desertion by the wife, the appellant-husband approached the Matrimonial Court under Section 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’), praying for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent by granting a decree of divorce. By the impugned order, the Trial Court has dismissed the petition. The husband is in appeal, impugned the judgment and order passed by the Matrimonial Court. 2. The marriage between the parties took place in 1971 according to Hindu rites and customs. They have, five daughters and a son, born out of the wedlock. The husband alleged that, for more than two years, his wife has not joined him at the place of his permanent residence and/or the places of his posting. There is allegation made against the wife in respect of the property and money matters. There is also an assertion that, panchayath was held to bring back his wife, for staying with him, but she refused to do so. After serving a notice, the a...