Karnataka Court February 1955 Judgments
Jamila Bi Vs. Mahboob Bi and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-18-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Kant98; AIR1955Mys98
ORDER1. This is a revision petition preferred by the Petitioner-plaintiff against the order of the learned Third Additional District Judge, Bangalore, in Misc. A. 81/53, confirming that of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Banga-lore, in O. S. No. 25 of 1952-53, holding that the value of the subject matter of the suit was beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of his Court and returning the plaint for presentation to proper Court.2. The facts that have given rise to this petition are briefly as follows:The petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit against the respondents-defendants in the Court of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Bangalore, alleging that the Respondents-defendants were in occupation of the schedule premises with her permission, that the said permission was subsequently revoked by her, that she had issued a notice to quit, that the defendants did not comply with her request and continued to be in occupation and that they should be evicted and possession of the premise...
Tag this Judgment!Bangalore Municipal Corporation Vs. Tallam Subbaraya Setty and Sons
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Kant110; AIR1955Mys110
1. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant-defendant against the judgment and decree of, the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Bangalore, in Regular Appeal No. 114 of 51-52, reversing those of the learned First Munsiff, Bangalore, in O. S. No. 48'of 1950-51 decreeing the respondent-plaintiff's suit.2. The appellant-defendant in this case is the Bangalore Municipal Corporation, and the respondent-plaintiff is a cloth merchant doing business in Bangalore. Plaintiff's suit was for the refund of a sum of Rs. 699-11-6 paid by him to the defendant-Corporation as octroi duty on certain bales of cloth which were got into the defendant-Corporation limits and which were subsequently removed outside the Corporation limits for purposes of sale.3. In their written statement the defendant-Corporation put the plaintiff to proof of the facts alleged in the plaint and they further contended that the claim for refund was barred by time as the same was not preferred within two months after the c...
Tag this Judgment!Nimba and ors. Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-02-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Kant112; AIR1955Mys112; 1955CriLJ1083
ORDER1. This is a Revision Petition preferred by the Petitioners-Accused against the order of the learned Special Second Magistrate, Shimoga, in C.C. 545/54, refusing permission to their Advocate Sri Bhavani shankara Rao to appear for and defend them.2. The facts that have given rise to this petition are briefly as follows : The Petitioners are under-trial prisoners in C.C. No. 545/54 on the file of the learned Special Second Magistrate, Shimoga. At a late stage of the enquiry, the Petitioners wanted to engage Sri Bhavani shankara Rao as their counsel to defend them in the case. The said Sri Bhavani shankara Rao was examined as P.W. 58 in the case for the prosecution. Therefore he filed an application to the learned Magistrate praying for permission to allow him to appear for and defend the accused. The learned Magistrate refused the said permission on the ground that as Sri Bhavani shankara Rao had been examined as a witness for the prosecution, it was not desirable to permit him to d...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›