Karnataka Court September 1960 Judgments
State of Mysore Vs. Gurupadappa Appayyappa Kardesai
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Kant257; AIR1961Mys257
Narayana Pai, J.1. The Nyaya Panchayat of Ankalgi village, Gokak Taluk, Balgaum District, constituted under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act of 1933, convicted the respondent Gurupadappa Appayyappa Kardesai of the offence of having contravened one of the bye-laws made under the Act and imposed a fine of Rs. 11/- on him in respect of it. He appealed to the Sessions Court, Bdgaum, in Criminal Appeal No. 172 of 1957 on its file. The Sessions Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and acquitted the respondent. Against that order of acquittal, the State has filed tills appeal under Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. On behalf of the respondent, a preliminary objection has been raised to the maintainability of this appeal. The contention on his behalf is that his appeal to the Sessions Court, the order in which is attacked in the appeal now before us, was presented to the Sessions Court under the provisions of Section 78 of the Bombay Act and that an order in appea...
Tag this Judgment!Sidrammappa Veerabhadrappa and anr. Vs. Babajappa Balappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-14-1960
Reported in: AIR1962Kant38; AIR1962Mys38
Hedge, J.(1) This appeal arises from the decision of the earned Judge ( Senior Division ) at Belgagum, in Defendants 1 and 2 in that suit are the appellants in his Court. Plaintiffs 1 and 2 are respondents 1 and 2 respectively and third defendant there in is the third respondent. The suit is for partion and possession of half share in the properties detailed in the plaint schedules a, b, c, and D. It has been decreed as prayed for. Aggrieved by the decree and Judgment of the Court below defendants 1 and 2 have come up in appeal to this Court .(2) The second plaintiff is the daughter-in-law of the first defendant. Her husband Balappa, the only son of the first defendant died on 9-12-1945. She claims that she had adopted the first plaintiff to her deceased husband on 11-6-1952. The second defendant is the wife of the items of property included in the plant schedule ( City Survey No. 1295 ). Hence he has been made a party to the suit. The right of way claimed by him was recognized by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Chanbasayya Devagappa Yaligar and anr. Vs. Basayya and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Kant191; AIR1961Mys191
1. This Second Appeal arises out ot L. C. Suit No. 27 of 1953 on the file of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Haveri, The present first respondent had filed that suit for partition and possession of his half share in the suit schedule properties. The plaintiff had claimed that he was the adopted son of one Gurushiddayya who had died in the year 1919. He had alleged that Jambawa (defendant No. 6) the widow of Gurushiddayya had taken him in adoption on 20th of October 1950. Defendant No. 1 was the grandson ot Gurushiddayya's brother Charantayya., Defendant 1's father and grandfather were both dead. Defendants 2 and 3 were the sons of the first defendant. Under the sale deed Ex. 82 dated 16-12-1948, defendant 1 had sold one of the suit lands to defendant 4 for Rs. 1800/-: under the sale deed Ex. 81, dated 17-12-1948, defendant 1 had alienated some of the suit properties, namely, S. No. 567 and three plots in S. No. 568 in favour of defendant No. 5 for a sum of Rs. 1300/-. The alienees, n...
Tag this Judgment!H.S. Satyanarayana Rao Vs. Govt. of Mysore and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: AIR1962Kant104; AIR1962Mys104
Somnath Iyer, J.(1) The petitioner before us applied for admission in June 1960 to the pre-University Class in the Government Intermediate College, Bangalore. On July 12, 1960, he was informed that he had been admitted to that class whereupon he paid the necessary fee. It appears that his admission was preceded by an interview which was made by the Members of the Committee who had to make that interview before whom the petitioner presented himself for that purpose. On July 18, 1960, the petitioner was informed by the Principal of that College that his admission had been revoked as a result of the discovery filed some false statement made by him in his application form. That false statement as has been explained to us now, although the communication sent by the Principal of that College to the petitioner itself did not refer to it expressly, consisted of the statement against Col. 5 of his application from that the last institution attended by the petitioner was the Arya Vidhya Shala Hi...
Tag this Judgment!State of Mysore Vs. Raju Shetty and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-12-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Kant74; AIR1961Mys74; 1961CriLJ403; ILR1960KAR1126
1. In respect of an incident which took place at about 8 a.m. on the morning of the 28th of April 1957 at Kuchoor in Arkula village, Manglore Taluk, South Kanara, in front of thehouse of one Iddinabba Beary, in which the said Iddinabba Beary received some simple injuries and one Mohamad Hussain alias Monu Beary received serious injuries which resulted in his death at the Hospital later that night, sixteen persons were tried by the learned Sessions Judge of South Kanara upon four charges.The first and the third of them were against all the 16 accused persons, the former being for the offence of rioting armed with deadly weapons punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code, and the latter for the offence of murder punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The second charge was only against the 2nd and the 5th accused for having committed the murder of the aforesaid Monu Beary in the course of the same transaction and in pursuance of their commo...
Tag this Judgment!Sangappa Andanappa Vs. Shivamurthiswamy Siddappalyaswamy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Kant106; AIR1961Mys106
1. This appeal under the provisions of Section 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, which will hereafter he referred to as the Act, is presented by a returned candidate whose election to the House of the People was declared void by an Election Tribunal. 2. The notification of the President under Section 14 of the Act, calling upon the Parliamentaryconstituencies to elect members to the House or the People was promulgated on January 19, 1957. 3. The Parliamentary constituency with which we are concerned in this appeal was known as the Koppal Parliamentary constituency, in the district of Raichur. The area of that constituency was that which consisted of eight Assembly Constituencies. Three of those constituencies were in the district of Bellary and they were Shirguppa, Hospet and Hedagali. The five constituencies which were in the district of Raichur were Kushtagi, Sindhanoor, Gangavati, Koppal and Yelburga. 4. The election commenced on February 25, 1957, and continued till Ma...
Tag this Judgment!United Karnatak Insurance Company Ltd. (Successor - Life Insurance Cor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1960
Reported in: (1961)ILLJ472Kant
Hegde, J. 1. These proceedings arise out of the decree and judgment of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, at Dharwar, in Special C.S. No. 12 of 1951 on his file. The appellant is the defendant in that suit and the respondent is the plaintiff. 2. The defendant at the relevant time was a public limited company (which shall be hereinafter referred to as 'the company') carrying on insurance business having had its head office at Dharwar. The plaintiff was a servant under that company. He joined that company in the year 1931. Between 1931 and 1936, he served the company in different capacities. He was appointed as the manager of that company in about October 1936. On 7th April, 1948 the managing director of the company placed the plaintiff under suspension on the basis of certain charges served on him. That order of the managing director was duly approved by the directors subsequently. Ultimately the plaintiff was dismissed from the company's services by the board of directors. The p...
Tag this Judgment!United Karnatak Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Govardhana Rao Venkata Rao
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Kant49; AIR1961Mys49; ILR1960KAR1100
Hegde, J.1. These proceedings arise out of the decree and judgment of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Dharwar, in Special Civil Suit No. 12 or 1951 on his file. The appellant is the defendant in that suit and the respondent is the plaintiff.2. The defendant at the relevant time was a Public Limited Company (which shall he hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') carrying on insurance business having had its head office at Dharwar. The plaintiff was a servant under that Company. He joined that Company in the year 1931. Between 1931 to 1936 he served the Company in different capacities. He was appointed as the Manager of that Company in about October 1936. On 7-4-1948 the Managing Director of the Company placed the plaintiff under suspension On the basis of certain charges served on him.That order of the Managing Director was duly approved by the Directors subsequently. Ultimately the plaintiff was dismissed from the Company's services by the Board of Directors. The plaintif...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›