Karnataka Court March 1952 Judgments
Hassan Co-operative Society Vs. H.S. Suryanaranappa and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-24-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Kant127; AIR1952Mys127
1. The Hassan Co-operative Society Ltd., who is the appellant in this second appeal, obtained an award for some monies due to it in the Court of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies at Hassan and after getting the necessary certificate on 26-10-1943 sought execution of it in the Court of the Munsiff of Hassan in Ex. Case No. 605 of 43-44. The decree was partly satisfied and the execution was dismissed on 2-6-44. The decree-holder then filed the present application, Ex. No. 1035 of 46-47 and applied for arrest of judgment-debtor 2 who pleaded that the execution application was. barred by limitation. The Munsiff rejected that plea. On appeal, the Additional Subordinate Judge at Hassan upheld that plea and dismissed the execution application. Hence this second appeal.2. As the matter involved an important question of limitation which might affect the execution of a large number of awards passed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and his assistants, the Advocate-Genera...
Tag this Judgment!Gurunatha Bhatta Vs. Nadiga Nagesha Rao
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Kant129; AIR1952Mys129; ILR1952KAR379
1. This second appeal arises out of a suit filed by the Appellant for a declaration of his title to and possession of a piece of land and a house. The plaintiff's case was that these suit properties and others belonged to one Gundabhatta who died on 11-6-37 leaving behind him a widow Shakambaramma and without any issue male or female. Shakambaramma had duly adopted the plaintiff on 20-6-1938 and had also executed a registered deed of adoption of the same date to evidence it. Thereby the plaintiff had become entitled to all the properties movable and immovable of the deceased Gundabhatta. He learnt that Shakambaramma had, prior to the adoption, gifted away the suit properties to the defendant by a registered deed of gift dated 24-5-1938 and he was in possession under the gift. The plaintiff was not bound by that gift which was wholly beyond the powers of the write make and, as his own rights as adoptive must be deemed to have accursed as from the date of Gundabhatta's death, he was enti...
Tag this Judgment!S.N. Rajan Vs. V.S. Govindaraj Mudaliar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Kant1; AIR1953Mys1
Mallappa, J.1. The suit in respect of which this appeal arises, was filed by the plaintiff-appellant for a declaration that the order passed by the District Judge, Civil Station, Bangalore, in appeal against the order in H. R. C. 106 of 1948, (directing his eviction) was without jurisdiction, as the defendant-respondent of whom he is a tenant, had not terminated the tenancy by the issue of a proper notice before he applied to the House Rent Controller for his eviction. The plea that the tenancy had not been terminated by issue of a notice or otherwise was not taken before the House Rent Controller. It was not contended before him that he had no jurisdiction on any such ground. All the same it is contended that the civil Courts have jurisdiction to ascertain whether the House Rent Controller has exceeded his jurisdiction, in passing an order of eviction, & the decision of this Court in -- 'Gururajachar v. Rangiah', 52 Mys H C R 455 has been relied on.2. There is hardly any doubt that an...
Tag this Judgment!M. Gurumurthappa Vs. M. Chickmunisamappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Kant62; AIR1953Mys62
Vasudevamurthy, J.1. This Miscellaneous Appeal is against an order of remand matte by the Subordinate Judge of Bangalore in R. A. 129 of 48-49 bv which he set aside the order of the First Munsiff of Bangalore dismissing an application I. A. II in Ex. Case No. 195 of 48-49. The facts relating to this application are as follows:2. The appellant, the landord, applied to the House Rent Controller, Bangalore and obtained an order of eviction against the respondent, the tenant, in H. R. C. Case No. 820 of 45-46 on 22-11-46. That order was finally affirmed by the Government by an order dated 20-10-47. Thereafter the appellant applied for the execution of that order and in Ex. Case 195 of 48-49 on the file of the First Munsiff of Bangalore, he was duly put in possession of the premises concerned in this case on 31-10-1948. The respondent then filed his present application I. A. II on 8-11-48 under Ss. 47 and 151, C. P. C. for restitution or redelivery back to him o the premises on the ground t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›