Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1954Kant9; AIR1954Mys9
ORDER1. This is a revision petition against the conviction and sentence passed by the' Additional Sessions Judge, Shimoga, in Chikmagalur Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 51-52, confirming the conviction of the accused of an offence under Section 417, I.P.C. but modifying the- sentence passed on she petitioner by the Munsiff-Magistrate of Narasimharajapur in C.C. No. 98 of 50-51. 2. The case against the petitioner is that he induced the Government to pass PR order that certain G.I. Pipes belonging to Kallatipura village panchayat might be sold to him at the rate of 0-6-0 per foot and induced them to believe that they were needed by him for being used for agricultural purposes for his lands. That such an order was passed by the Government and that in his applications before different authorities he referred to lands as 'my' land or 'our' lands is not disputed. It is in evidence that the G.I. pipes had been laid for purposes of affording water facilities to the village and that they had become o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1954Kant87; AIR1954Mys87
Venkataramaiya, J.1. This appeal arises from a suit for possession of the lands described in the plaint schedule and mesne profits. The plaintiffs are the sons of the purchaser of these properties at a Court sale held in execution of a mortgage decree obtained by him against two persons Mallikarjunaswamy and his father Mallappa. Defendant is the Government of Mysore whose servants are said to have wrongfully dispossessed the plaintiffs. That the properties were hypothecated to plaintiff's father 'under a registered deed, Ex. A, dated 20-6-1932 executed by Mallappa and his son, that the mortgage was sued upon in O. S. No. 77 of 43-44, that in Execution Case No. 108 of 43-14 the properties were purchased by plaintiffs' father in satisfaction of the decree and that subsequent proceedings in Mis. 101 of 45-46 also indicate delivery may all be deemed to be proved. The suit is dismissed on the ground that the properties did not belong to the defendant-judgment-debtors but to the Channabasava...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1954Kant88; AIR1954Mys88; ILR1953KAR604
1. This second appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff for partition and possession of her snare in the plaint schedule properties. The plaintiff is the step-mother of the defendant who has become the sole surviving coparcener of the family after his father's death. The plaintiff claimed in the plaint as originally filed a 1/4th share in the properties and later by an amendment she claimed 1/3rd. Both the lower Courts have awarded a l/3rd share to her and the defendant has appealed 2. The only point that arises in. this appeal is the share to which the plaintiff is entitled. The appellant contends that it is only 1/4th while the respondent urges that the lower Courts have rightly decreed a third share in her favour. The lower Courts have assumed that she is entitled to a l/3rd share and there is no discussion in this matter at all. There are also no reported decisions of this Court directly bearing on this matter and there can of course be no precedents in Courts outside the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1954Kant38; AIR1954Mys38; ILR1953KAR588; (1954)32MysLJ101
1. The appellant and respondent 1 in a joint petition applied under the provisions of the Mysore Silicosis Rules for the award of compensation to them for the death of their husband B. Periathambi from the Mysore Gold Mining Company of India Ltd., Kolar Gold Fields. The petition which contained a clear and unambiguous averment that each of them was the married wife of the deceased was jointly signed by the appellant and respondent 1, The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, K. G. F. recorded the evidence of the appellant and respondent 1 and the sister of the deceased and pronounced his order dated 10-6-1952 awarding the amount deposited by the Mysore Gold Mining Company as compensation for the death of Periathambi to respondent 1 and her son, respondent 2. He disallowed the claim of the appellant for apportionment of the compensation on the ground that being a Christian, her marriage with the deceased Periathambi who at the time of the marriage was a Hindu, was invalid and could n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1953Kant146; AIR1953Mys146; ILR1953KAR329
1. The Chitaldrug Police placed a charge-sheet against the respondent before the Second Magistrate, Chitaldrug, under Section 4(i) (a), Mysore Prohibition Act. When the case was pending, the prosecution applied to the Magistrate for amending the provision of the charge by the substitution of Section '4(1) (c)' of the same Act for Section '4(i)(a)'. The Magistrate having refused the prayer, the prosecution approached the District Magistrate to refer the matter under Section 438, Criminal P. C., to the High Court. The District Magistrate declined to make a reference and rejected the petition on 12-3-52. As the records were called for by the District Magistrate, the trial Court went on adjourning the case to several dates of hearing intervening the disposal, and the order sheet of 13-3-1952 reads thus: 'Accused absent, await orders 24-3-52.' On 24-3-52, the Magistrate dismissed the case at 11-30 A.M. acquitting the accused under Section 247, Criminal P. C. on the ground that the Prosecuti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1954Kant89; AIR1954Mys89; ILR1953KAR578; (1955)33MysLJ4
Vasudevamurthy, J1. The appellant was the plaintiff in the Court of the First Munsif of Bangalore. He brought a suit for a permanent injunction restraining the Bangalore City Municipality, either by itself or through its servants from issuing permits or making leases in favour of anybody else to vend fruits in the Kalasipalyam Bus stand, Bangalore City, so long as the lease in his favour subsisted and was not otherwise legally terminated. The Municipality had, it was alleged, granted a lease in his favour by an agreement dated 9-12-1948 conferring upon him the sole and exclusive right to vend fruits in the entire area known as Kalasipalyam Bus Stand on a monthly rental of Rs. 32/-; notwithstanding that grant the Municipality is said to have given licences to other people to similarly vend fruits in that area before the arrangement in his own favour was property terminated. That suit was filed on 26-9-1949 but subsequently on 6-3-1950 the plaintiff filed with the permission of the Court...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1954Kant132; AIR1954Mys132
ORDER1. This is a revision petition against the order of the Additional District Judge, Civil Station, Bangalore, in H.R.C. Appeal No. 331 of 51-52 confirming the order of the House Rent, Controller, Civil Station, Bangalore in R.C. 720/FR/51. 2. The tenant who is the respondent in this Court was the petitioner before the House Rent Controller. He filed a petition saying that originally he agreed to pay a rent of Rs. 125/-for the premises let out to him including a garage and a room. He went on paying this rent till 1-4-51, but later the landlord disputed that the amount paid was fixed only for the house and did not include the rent for the garage and the room. Thereon he consented to pay Rs. 130/- per month. He went on paying at the rate of Rs. 130/- till the end of December 1950. The rent was again enhanced to Rs. 140/- in January 1951 and an application was thereupon filed by him for fixation of fair rent on the 30th March 1951. The House Rent Controller has fixed the rent at Rs. 12...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1953Kant87; AIR1953Mys87; ILR1953KAR570; (1954)32MysLJ98
ORDER1. This is a revision petition against the order in Misc. Appeal No. 27/50-51 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Mysore, setting aside the order of the learned Munsiff Nanjangud, in Execution Case No. 1320/46-47 and confirming a sale held in that execution case. 2. The property concerned was brought to sale on 19-5-48- The decree-holder had applied for permission to bid and permission had been given for purchasing the property for a sum not less than Rs. 700/-. A stranger purchaser however purchased the property for Rs. 450/-. The Process Nazir who held the sale did not accept the bid and reserved the right of accepting the bid but placed the matter before the Court. The case came up before the Court on 23-5-48. On that date, the judgment-debtor stated that he would deposit the decree amount due to the decree-holder in ease the acceptance of the bid was postponed. The case was thereafter brought up on a subsequent date. The judgment-debtor had not paid the money as prom...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1954Kant133; AIR1954Mys133
1. This second appeal arises out of an order in an insolvency case. The appellant who holds a decree in O.S. No. 22/37-38 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Shimoga, against the respondent for Rs. 2855-7-0 made an application on 17-8-43 for declaring the respondent an insolvent. The respondent raised several objections which were negatived and the Subordinate Judge directed that he should be adjudicated. On appeal the District Judge of Shimoga reversed that order and dismissed the appellant's application on the ground that the respondent was able to pay his debts and he has come up in second appeal. 2. For the respondent, Mr. M. Ramachandra Rao, his learned counsel, has raised a preliminary objection to the hearing of this second appeal. He urges that under Section 75(1) of the Mysore Insolvency Act XI of 1925 which governs this case, only certain orders passed under the Act are subject to second appeal and that the present order, which falls under Section 25 of the Act, is not liab...
Tag this Judgment!