Karnataka Court September 1957 Judgments
Bangalore Woollen, Cotton and Silk Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Mysore ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-27-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Kant26; AIR1958Mys26; (1957)35MysLJ359
Sadasivayya, J.1. This petition purports to be under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The petitioner is the Bangalore Woollen, Cotton and Silk Mills Company Limited, Bangalore; the 1st respondent is the State of Mysore, the 2nd respondent is the Industrial Tribunal at Bangalore and the third respondent is an employee in the Petitioner Mills. The circumstances out of which tha present petition arises, briefly, are as follows :--2. The third respondent who was a lorry cleaner in the Petitioner Mills was alleged to have committed theft of a rug piece from the Petitioner Mills on 23-12-1955. The Manager of the Petitioner Mills hold an enquiry and examined witnesses. The management reached the conclusion that there was ample evidence to prove the charge of theft against the third Respondent and decided to discharge him from service. But, as an Indus-trial Dispute in Industrial Case No. 11 of 55 was pending at that time, before the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, the Management coul...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Kempegowda and ors. Vs. Channaveeriah and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-27-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Kant43; AIR1958Mys43; ILR1957KAR277; (1957)35MysLJ392
Hegde, J.1. This is a second appeal filed by the defendant against the decision of the District Judge of Mysore in R.A. No. 120 of 1952-53. The suit is for recovery of Rs. 3000/- principal and Rs. 3000/- interest, claimed as due on a registered hypothecation bond dated 4-3-1927. The learned Sub-Judge tried the case as O.S. No. 27/50-51 and dismissed the suit as being barred by limitation. On other material issues the Courts below have concurrently found against the defendants.As against this decision the legal representatives of the plaintiff, (Original plaintiff having died by that time) took up the matter in appeal to the Court of the District Judge, Mysore. The learned District Judge allowed the appeal and decreed the sum claimed in the suit. The defendants have come up in Second Appeal.As the appeal is governed by Section 100 of the Mysore C.P.C., the appellants are entitled to canvass the correctness of the decision on questions of facts as well, as the judgment appealed against i...
Tag this Judgment!Ullal Dinkar Rao Vs. M. Ratna Bai
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-27-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Kant77; AIR1958Mys77; ILR1957KAR271; (1957)35MysLJ381
ORDER1. On an application made by the respondent under Section 8 of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, her landlord the petitioner was directed by the Controller to restore to the respondent the amenities of a cow-shed and a bath-room both of which had been destroyed by heavy rains in the year 1954. The finding o the Controller was that it was the continued neglect on the part of the Petitioner, who had made an unsuccessful attempt to evict the Respondent, to prevent erosion of the walls of a storm water drain, that caused the destruction of these portions of the leased building.2. The Petitioner's appeal to the appellate authority against that order failed, and his revision petition to the District Court of South Kanara under Section 12-B of the Act was also dismissed. This further revision petition is directed against the order of the District Court, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.3. Mr. Karanth learned Advocate for the Respondent raised a preliminar...
Tag this Judgment!Ramiah Vs. Cowdiah and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Kant140; AIR1958Mys140; ILR1957KAR351; (1958)36MysLJ158
ORDER1. In execution of a money decree obtained against respondent 2, by respondent 1 an immoveable property was attached and ordered to be sold on 22-3-1956 and five days before that date the petitioner presented a claim petition under the provisions or Order XXI rule 58 C. P. C. objecting to the attachment. In that application he asked for a postponement of the sale on which the Court below does not however appear to have made any order.The property appears to have been sold and purchased by the decree-holder for the amount due to him under the decree. On 28-9-1956 the Court below dismissed the claim petition on the ground that an investigation of the claim was not competent after the sale of the attached property. This revision petition is directed against that order,2. Sri Dayananda learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the view taken by the Court below that the sale of the attached property deprived the Court of its Jurisdiction to investigate the claim was unsupportab...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Govinda Reddy and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Kant150; AIR1958Mys150; 1958CriLJ1489
H. Hombe Gowda, J.1. These two appeals are against the judgment dated the 7th November, 1956 of the Principal Sessions Judge, Bangalore Division, in Bangalore Sessions Case No. 29 of 1956 convicting and sentencing all the three appellants Govinda Reddy, Krishna and Muniswamy (Accused Nos. 3, 1 and 2 respectively in the trial Court) of the following, offences :--(1) under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on six counts and sentencing each of the appellants to the extreme penalty of law on each of those counts; (2) under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years; (3) under Section 457 read with. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years; (4) under Section 380 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years...
Tag this Judgment!T.K. Kantharaj Vs. Mahomed Nazeer Khan and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Kant172; AIR1959Mys172
ORDER1. In O. S. 259/53 the respondents brought a suit on the file of the Munsiff, Civil Station, Bangalore, against one Ramdas for the recovery of a certain sum of money said to be due to them under a promissory note. In that suit the respondents appear to have obtained an attachment of certain moveable properties. To this attachment the petitioner objected and preferred a claim, petition under the provisions of Order 38, Rule 8, C. P. C. In support of his claim the petitioner appears-to have relied upon two documents. One of them, was a sale deed dated 20-11-1950 and the other was an agreement to pay hire.It appears that the petitioner did not wish to rely on the sale deed in support of his claim but wished to do so only on the other agreement. The learned Munsiff, after perusing the sale deed on which the petitioner relied in support of his claim, tame to the conclusion that that document was liable to be impounded under the provisions of Section 33 of the Stamp Act since it appeare...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Subramaniyam Vs. T.T. Ponnakshiammal
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Kant41; AIR1958Mys41; 1958CriLJ397
ORDER1. This revision petition raises an interesting point of law regarding the interpretation of the term 'is living in adultery' appearing in Clause (4) of Section 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The respondent filed petition No. C. Mis. 37 of 1955 in the Court of the First Class Magistrate, Civil Station, Bangalore, claiming maintenance from her husband under Section 488, Cr. P. C. The husband, viz., the present petitioner, contended that he was not bound to maintain her and that she had disentitled herself to any maintenance by reason of her infidelity to him inasmuch as on 9-5-55 she was found to be in criminal intimacy with one Raman.The Magistrate came to the conclusion that adultery was proved on the part of the present respondent on two occasions. Relying on the rulings of certain High Courts, he further held that it does not amount to 'living in adultery' as contemplated under Section 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code. On 6-7-56 he awarded maintenance at Rs. 15 per month...
Tag this Judgment!State of Mysore Vs. Nanja
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-16-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Kant48; AIR1958Mys48; 1958CriLJ529; ILR1957KAR159
1. This is an appeal by the State of Mysore against the order dated 9-3-1956, passed by the Sessions Judge, Mysore Division, in Mandya Sessions Case No. 9 of 1956, acquitting the accused of an offence under Section 304, I. P. C.2. The case for the prosecution is that on 29-11-54 when all the inmates of the house had gone out to the fields leaving the accused and his old father, the former is alleged to have beaten the latter with an axe and a stone. The result was that the old man lay unconscious and was taken to the hospital at Malavalli. The Doctor found that his condition was serious and that it needed X-Ray examination. He was therefore, sent to the Mandya Hospital the same day. But he died there at 6-15 p.m. on 2-12-1954. The respondent is a boy aged about 30 years. He was charged with the offence under Section 304, Part II but he pleaded 'not guilty'. The learned Sessions Judge held that the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt to the accused beyond all reasonable doubt...
Tag this Judgment!Devarajiah Vs. B. Padmanna
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-10-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Kant84; AIR1958Mys84; (1958)36MysLJ88
ORDER1. The petitioner has lodged a complaint with the City Magistrate, Bangalore, against the Respondent alleging that the latter had issued a printed pamphlet according to the contents of which the complainant had no right to worship or enter into any Jain temple and the Complainant should be prevented from entering such places of public worship belonging to the Jain community and offering prayers and religious services in those places.He also alleged that the accused was encouraging untouchability by instigating the Jains not to have social or religious intercourse with others of the same religion like the Complainant. According to the Complainant, the accused has contravened Sections 3, 7 and 10 of the Untouchability Offences (1955) Act by such conduct and he prays that the matter be enquired into and that the accused be punished according to law.The learned Magistrate took the case on file in respect of an offence under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant went up...
Tag this Judgment!B.L. Betaiah Setty and ors. Vs. V.R. Subramanyam Trading as Manyam and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Kant85; AIR1959Mys85; (1958)36MysLJ852
N. Sreenivasa Rau, J.1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Ex-Officio Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks, Bangalore, refusing to register the Appellants' trade mark after considering the opposition of the Respondent The mark consists of two rectangular bars having in its middle an ornamental device of a star and with the words 'Raja agarbathies' displayed prominently in Hindi and English characters on the two bars.The registration of the mark was sought for in respect of Agarbathies (incense sticks) in Class 3 of the Fourth Schedule to the Trade Marks Rules, 1942. The Respondent opposed the registration on the ground that the applicants' mark was closely similar to Trade Mark No. 86443 which he has got registered in Class 3 in respect of soaps, perfumery, cosmetics, hair lotions and essential oils and that as agarbathies came under the same description of perfumery, Section 10(1) of the Trade Marks Act was a bar to registration of the applicant's trade mark.It was also urged by...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »