Karnataka Court November 1959 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
R. Viswanathan and ors. Vs. Ruknul-mulk S. Abdul Wajid and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Kant261; AIR1960Mys261
Hombe Gowda, J. (1) This petition under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure is for review of an order passed by us in Civil Petition Number 453 of 1958 refusing to issue a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court of India as against the order passed by us in Writ Petition Number 287 of 1958. (2) The facts leading up to the filing of this petition, in so far as they are relevant for the determination of the points raised in this case briefly stated are as follows:--The petitioners filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari quashing the judgments and decrees in Regular Appeals Numbers 104 and 109 of 1947-48 passed by a Full bench of the former High Court of Mysore reversing the judgments and decrees of the District Judge, Civil Station, Bangalore, in Original Suit Number 61(A) of 1947. They stated that the judgments and decrees in those appeals were null and void and inoperative on the ground of there being coram non...
Chief Engineer, Southern Army, Poona Vs. Harikiratsingh and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Kant205; AIR1960Mys205
ORDER(1) One Lt. Col. Harikirtsingh, care of Chief Engineer, Southern Command, Poona, made an application to the Court of the District Judge, Bangalore Miscellaneous No. 139 of 1947-48, under S. 11(2) of the Mysore Arbitration Act. It appears from the allegations made in that petition that in respect of an agreement entered into at Bangalore City between the Chief Engineer, Sourthern Army, on behalf of the Governor-General in Council of the one part and Messrs. Patel B. M. Venkataswamappa and Brothers of the other part under which the latter agreed to supply 40 lakhs of bricks at a certain rate and within a specified period, differences and disputes having arisen those were referred to arbitration pursuant to the provisions of the said agreement and that the Arbitrator, one Col H. W. Bush, made an award on 8-10-1947 holding that Messrs. Patel B. M. Venkataswamappa and Brothers should pay Rs. 12,575/- to the claimant, the Governor-General in Council represented by the Chief Engineer, So...
Ganapathi Bhatta Vs. State of Madras Now State of Mysore and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-06-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Kant222; AIR1960Mys222; ILR1960KAR130
Somnath Iyer, J. (1) The plaintiff, who is the appellant before us, was an young man who was prosecuting his studies in the Government College, Mangalore, in the year 1950. On 5-8-1950, when he was proceeding to the Rationing Office in Mangalore on a bicycle with his friend P.W. 4, along a road known as Kadri road, a motor vehicle belonging to the Civil Supplies Department of the State of Madras, bearing Register No. M. S. C. 9714, which, according to the plaintiff, was being driven at an excessive speed, knocked him down in front Beedi Factory, situate in that road. As a result of that accident, the plaintiff lost consciousness which he partially regained in the hospital to which he was admitted as an inpatient about midnight on that date. He became fully conscious only five days after his admission to the hospital where he was treated for the injuries sustained by him during the accident.(2) Ext. A-3, a certificate prepared by P.W. 2, who was the Medical Officer in charge of that hos...
Mahabala Hegde Vs. Meenakshi Heggadithi and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-05-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Kant193; AIR1960Mys193; ILR1960KAR226
(1) In the village of Neerve in the District of South Kanara, there was a family governed by the Aliyasanthana Law, consisting of three sisters and five brothers. Pushpavathi, Meenakshi and Narasamma were the three sisters. Mahabala, Thejappa, Anthiah, Venkappa and Krishnayya were the five brothers. Mahabala was the plaintiff in the suit out of which this appeal arises. Meenakshi was defendant 1, Thejappa was defendant 2 and the other three brothers were not parties to this suit.(2) A dispute having arisen between the members of this family in regard to their family properties, it was referred to arbitration. The reference was to three arbitrators who made an award, in pursuance of which in O. S. 43/1937 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of South Kanara a decree was made on 9-12-1938.(3)The arbitrators did not themselves divide the family properties between the members of that family. They gave direction as to the manner in which such division should take place. What the arbitrators...
Narayana Narasimh Deshpande and anr. Vs. Kashiraya Sengappa Nisabat an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1959
Reported in: AIR1961Kant35; AIR1961Mys35
1. The appellants are the plaintiffs, who have lost in both the courts. The appellants claimed to be the representatives of the original lessor and sued the respondents as representatives of the original lessees under a document exhibit 57 in the case dated the 22nd of July 1872 for recovery of possession on the ground that they had terminated the tenancy under that document by issuing a notice to the respondents under exhibit 51-A dated the 7th of January 1947. The respondents resisted the suit on the ground that they were not lessees or tenants at all, hut were actual full owners of the property. They asserted that the alleged agreement of 1872 was totally false.2. Both the courts below have disposed of this matter on an interpretation of the document exhibit 57. Both the courts recognise that the property originally belonged to the ancestor of the appellants and that the ancestors or predecessors in interest of the respondents obtained possession there or from the original owner upo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›