Karnataka Court January 1961 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.
Jivakka and anr. Vs. Ramappa Yallappa Mutgi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-1961
Reported in: AIR1961Kant244; AIR1961Mys244; ILR1961KAR133
S.R. Das Gupta, C.J. 1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was for partition and possession of the plaintiff's share in the suit property. The defendants in the said suit are the appellants before us. It is necessary to set out a genealogical table in order to understand the relationship of the parties and the point which was involved in the suit:. BASWANT ANAGOL wife Yellawa ______________|_________________ | |Jivakka (deft. 1) Akkawa Ramappa. | (Akkawa's husband, Plaff.)2. Baswant was the original owner of the suit property. He died leaving his widow Yellawa and the two daughters Jivakka, defendant 1, and Akkawa. Yellawa died in 1912. The plaintiff's case is that Akkawa died after Yellawa and the plaintiff who is her husband became entitled on her death to half share in the suit property. The defendants dispute that Akkawa died after Yellawa. According to them, Akkawa's death took place before the death of Yellawa and, therefore, defendant 1 was the sole owner of the suit prope...
Hanmant Bando Kale Vs. Rango Kallo Huddar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-13-1961
Reported in: AIR1961Kant206; AIR1961Mys206
S.R. Das Gupta, C.J.1. This appeal raises an important point of Hindu Law. It arises in this way:--2. The appellant before us is the husband of the original plaintiff. The plaintiff filed a suit in the year 1944 for maintenance and a decree for maintenance was passed against the appellant An appeal was filed by the appellant against the said decree but that appeal was dismissed. A second appeal to the High Court also failed. Thereafter in the year 1948 execution proceedings were started by the plaintiff. Pending disposal of that execution proceedings the plaintiff on 27-11-48 assigned her right in respect of the-arrears of maintenance upto 1948 in favour of her brother. Thereafter the plaintiff died.The assignee then filed an application in which he prayed that his name be substituted in the execution proceedings. That application, was resisted by the judgment-debtor on the ground that the property in question being the non-saudayika property of his wife could not be alienated except w...
The State of Mysore Vs. K. Srinivasa Upadya
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-11-1961
Reported in: AIR1961Kant169; AIR1961Mys169; [1961(3)FLR332]; (1962)IILLJ267Kant
1. Both these appeals are connoted appeals. Sri K. Srinivasa Upadya, the Ma-nager of the Siddartha Printers, is the respondent in both these appeals. A common question of law arises in these appeals, and it is convenient to deal with it in one judgment.2. The Inspector of Factories at Mangalore laid two complaints against the respondent under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948. It is alleged that the premises known as 'Siddartha Printers' is an establishment that had been notified under section 85(1) of the Factories Act, 1948, and the provisions of Sections 1 to 11, 18, 42, 51 to 56, 61 to 63, 67 to 73, 92 to 115, 117 and 118 of the above Act had been made applicable to the same. The accused is the Occupier and Manager of that establishment. The complaints relate to contraventions of certain provisions of the Factories Act and the Rules framed thereunder.3. Both the cases were tried by the learned District Magistrate, South Kamra and the accused acquitted.4. The learned District Ma...
Salem Bangalore Sri Ranga Vilas Motors (Private) Ltd. Vs. S.S. Krishna ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-06-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Kant47; AIR1962Mys47; ILR1961KAR747
ORDER(1) One Krishna Sastry made application under the provisions of Rule 1 of Order 33 of Code of Civil Procedure for permission to sue the defendant-Company as a pauper for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 78,360/- as damages for injuries sustained by him in an accident in which he was involved while traveling in one of the buses belonging to that Company. Before that application was disposed of he, died and his brothers made an application that they should be substituted in that application for Krishna Sastry as his legal representative. This application was opposed by the defendant on the ground that the right to sue as a pauper which was personal to Krishna Sastry did not develop upon his brothers when he died. This contention was overruled by the District Judge who allowed the brother of Krishna Sastry to be brought on record as the legal representatives of Krishna Sastry and posted the case for enquiry into the pauperism of those brothers. It is against this order that the defendant...
Channappa and ors. Vs. Sivarudrappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-04-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Kant153; AIR1962Mys153
(1) This appeal arises out of the suit brought by the two plaintiffs for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 1000/- as compensation for malicious prosecution. The defendant and plaintiff No. 1 are brothers and plaintiff No. 2 is the one of one Gurappa, another brother of plaintiff No. 1 and the defendant.(2) On the 14th of April, 1952 the defendant presented a complaint in the Court of the Special First lass Magistrate, Ramanagaram in which he charged the two plaintiffs with having committed offences under the provisions of Sections 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. His allegation was that the plaintiffs assaulted and insulted him and therefore had committed offences punishable under the aforesaid two actions. By an order made on the 20th of August, 1952 the plaintiffs were discharged and thereafter the plaintiffs brought the suit out of which this appeal arises.(3) The Munsif made a decree in favour of the plaintiffs for a sum of Rs. 300/- . According to him, the plaintiffs spent a sum o...
L. Nagaraj L. Krishnamurthy Rao Vs. University of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-02-1961
Reported in: AIR1961Kant164; AIR1961Mys164
Narayana Pai, J. 1. The Petitioner, who appeared for the B. Sc. Degree Examination of the Mysore University in April 1960, prays for the issue of an appropriate writ quashing the order of the University notified under No. EX.CEP--148/60-61 D/- 12-8-1900 debarring him from appearing for the B. Sc. Degree Examination for a period of two years commencing from April 1960 Examination and for another writ o mandamus directing the respondent-University to announce the result of the Examination held in 1960 so far as the petitioner is concerned.2. The results of the Examination were in fact published by the University disclosing that the petitioner had passed in all the three Parts of the Examination in the Third Class with a note appended at the bottom reading that the results of certain candidates will be announced later, Among those candidates is the petitioner whose Register Number at the Examination is 1353. The enquiries made by the petitioner's father in respect of this note did not eli...
Gokaldas Melaram Vs. Baldevdas T. Chabria
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-02-1961
Reported in: AIR1961Kant188; AIR1961Mys188
ORDER1. An interesting question of jurisdictions arises in this civil revision petition in this way. The plaintiff who is the respondent in this civil revision petition, brought a suit in the Court of the Principal Civil Judge, Bangalore, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as damages from his father-in-law who is the petitioner in this revision petition. The plaintiffs case was that ho was subjected to a malicious prosecution by the defendant in the Court of the 19th Presidency Magistrate, Bombay which ended in bis acquittal. On September 25, 1956, according to the defendant's case, a defamatory communication was addressed by the plaintiff to his wife which however was enclosed in an envelope addressed to a friend of the plaintiff's wife. This Communication was made the subject matter of the prosecution for defamation by the defendant against the plaintiff and the summons in that criminal case which was commenced in the Bombay Court was served on the plaintiff in Bangalore on De...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›