Karnataka Court January 1963 Judgments
K.T. Appanna Vs. Corporation of City of Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-29-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Kant338; (1963)1MysLJ571
Somnath Iyer, J.A hotel-keeper in Bangalore who was called upon by the Corporation of the City of Bangalore to pay a licence fee of Rs. 300/- for obtaining a licence for the year 61-62 to conduct his hotel business, is the petitioner before us. The demand made by the Corporation is called in question on more than one ground. The first submission made is that since the licence fee which the petitioner is now called upon to pay was not prescribed by a bye-law made for that purpose under Clause (13) of Section 367 of the City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, the demand was without the authority of law. The second submission was that since the fee was prescribed by a resolution passed by the Corporation, the licence fee was not exigible. The third was that even if the Corporation had the power to prescribe the licence fee, what was prescribed was excessive since the necessary correlation between the services rendered by the Corporation to the Hotelier and the fee imposed, did ...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Kampu Shetty
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Kant95; AIR1965Mys95; 1965CriLJ456; (1964)1MysLJ538
M. Sadasivayya, J. (1) This revision case arises out of a reference made under Section 341 of the Cr. P.C. by the Second Additional District Munsiff-Magistrate, Mangalore. This pertains to accused No. 16 in Preliminary Register Case No. 4 of 1961 on the file of the said Magistrate. Accused No. 4 of 1961 on the file of the said Magistrate. Accused No. 16, along with some of the other accused in that case, has been charged for an offence punishable under section 395 of the I.P.C. and has been committed to take his trial, along with those accused, before the Court of Sessions at Mangalore. After so committing the said accused to take his trial before the Court of Session, the said committing Magistrate has made the present reference under section 341 of the Cr. P.C.(2) Shri M.K. Sreenivasa Iyengar, the learned High Court Government Pleader has appeared for the State; the 16th accused, though served with notice, has not appeared before this Court either in person or through counsel.(3) The...
Tag this Judgment!K.T. Venkata Gowda Vs. Devamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Kant40; AIR1964Mys40; (1963)1MysLJ582
1. This is an execution appeal by Judgment-debtor 5 from the orders of the Court below allowing execution to proceed against the property of which he had become the purchaser in a previous execution sale.2. The material facts are these:In original suit No. 700 of 1953 on the file of the Munsiff, Mandya, a decree was made for the payment of maintenance in favour of the respondent Devamma, and as security for the payment at that maintenance a charge was created on her husband's share in the family properties. For the recovery of the maintenance which had accrued toner, the respondent brought her husband's share in seven items of properties to sale in Execution case No. 652 of 1954. On September 5, 1955, tile appellant purchased those properties. In execution case No. 757 of 1959, the respondent again-brought those very properties to sale for recovery of maintenance which had accrued to her after the presentation of the previous execution application, and, the objection to the execution s...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Mysore Vs. Seetharam
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mys50; 1964CriLJ410; ILR1963KAR469; (1963)1MysLJ520
Sadasivayya, J.1. This Revision Case arises out of a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge, South Kanara recommending that the order dated 22-9-1962 made by the Additional District Munsiff Magistrate, Udipi in P. R. C. No. 6 of 1962 committing the accused Seetharama to take his trial before the Court of Session for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, be quashed.In consequence of the said order of commitment, Seetharama had to, be tried in Sessions Case No. 33 of 1962, in the Court of the Sessions Judge, South Kanara. But, before the trial could commence, an application was filed by the counsel food the accused; that application purported to be under Sections 435 and 438 read with Sections 464 and 465 of (he Criminal Procedure Code. It was alleged in that application that from the documents referred to under Section 173 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code and produced before the Magistrate, there was every reason for the Magistrate to believe that the accused wa...
Tag this Judgment!P.H. Alphonso Vs. C.F. De Costa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Kant187; AIR1964Mys187; (1963)1MysLJ596
T.K. Tukol, J.1. The appellant filed Miscellaneous Case No. 78 of 1953 in the Court of the District Judge, Civil Station, Bangalore, for revocation of the probate granted to the first respondent on 1-8-1953 in respect of the will and codicil executed by the petitioner's mother Mrs. Florence Emellia Alphanso on the ground that the executor (Respondent No. 1) had sold the only immovable property comprising the estate fraudulently and collusively for a nominal sum of Rs. 20,400/- though in, fact the property was worth more than Rs. 30,000/-. Respondent No. 2 is the purchaser of the property. The respondents 1 and 2 questioned the maintainability of the application alleging that the ground mentioned in the petition for the revocation of the grant did not all within the scope of Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The learned District Judge upheld the contention of the two respondents and dismissed the application with costs.2. The sole point raised by Sri Govindaraju en behalf ...
Tag this Judgment!G.K. Kumar Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-23-1963
Reported in: 1963CriLJ466
ORDERA.R. Somnath Iyer, J.1. Accused 3 who has been convicted by the First Class Magistrate, Civil Station, Bangalore, of an offence punishable under Section 224 of the Penal Code and whose conviction has been confirmed by the Court of Sessions, is the petitioner before me.2. According to the evidence of P. Ws. 1 and 2 which both the Courts believed, accused 3 was found in a place in Broadway Road, conducting a gambling operation. Accused, according to their evidence, was also there but before accused 1 could be apprehended, he decamped with the result that P. Ws. 1 and 2 were able to apprehend only accused 3. P. W. 1 is a head constable and P. W. 2 is a constable. When they were conducting accused 3 to the police station together with the instruments of gaming which they seized, at a place near the new market, accused 1 and 2 who were near a shop prevented P. Ws. 1 and 2 from proceeding further and made it possible for accused 3 to escape from lawful custody. The evidence given by P. ...
Tag this Judgment!Veerathaiah and anr. Vs. Ramaswamy Iyengar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-11-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Kant11; AIR1964Mys11; 1964CriLJ52; ILR1963KAR435; (1963)1MysLJ253
ORDER1. The petitioners have filed this revision petition against the order passed by the Second City Magistrate, Mysore in C. C. No. 5596 of 1961 convicting them in a summary trial for the offence of house trespass under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.2. The prosecution was started on a complaint filed by the respondent on 19-7-1961 complaining that the accused committed house trespass punishable under Section 453, I. P. C. by forcibly entering into a portion of the building bearing No. 81 in Kumaraswamy Galli, Killed Mohalla, Mysore City on 13-9-1960 at about 6-45 A.M. after breaking open the lock. The accused pleaded not guilty. On the evidence the learned Magistrate held that the accused had committed house trespass and had forcibly entered into the house in the possession of the complainant with intent to cuisine annoyance and wrongful loss. He. however, expressed ...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Mysore Vs. Gowri Vithal Deshbhandari and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-11-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Kant113; AIR1964Mys113
Govinda Bhat, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of , the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Karwar, in Original Civil Suit Number 139/1955, in which the respondents 1 to 5 claimed damages in respect of the death of one Vithal Laxman Deshbhandari on 1st October 1954 as a result of a fatal accident caused to him by a motor vehicle driven by the second defendant, a motor driver employed by the first defendant. The plaintiffs brought the suit, out of which this appeal arose, under Section 1-A of; the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 (Act XIII of 1855) on their own behalf and on behalf of the defendants 3 and 4, the parents of the deceased, on the ground that Vithal Laxman Deshbhandari's death was caused by the negligence, of the second defendant, for which the first defendant was responsible. The first plaintiff is the wife and plaintiffs 2 to 5 are the minor children of the deceased Vithal Laxman Deshbhandari who was working as a porter in the bus stand at Honavar.There...
Tag this Judgment!P. Narasimha Iyengar Vs. Lakkanna
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-10-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Kant41; AIR1964Mys41; (1963)2MysLJ373
1. This is a judgment-debtor'ssecond appeal against the concurrent findings of both the courts below. The appellant-judgment-debtorpleaded that it was agreed between him and the decree-holder that a sum of Rs. 605/- would begiven deduction to by the decree-holder. In other words, he pleaded a predecretal term. There was a compromise between the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor and as a result of that compromise, the decree was passed for a sum ofRs. 7,000/- against the judgment-debtor-appellant. Most of the decretal amount was paid by the judgment-debtor, leaving a balance of Rs. 893-8-0. Thedegree-holder filed an execution for the recovery of the said amount. The judgment-debtor filed an objection pleading the predecretal adjustment of Rs. 605/- as stated supra. The question that had to be decided by the twolower courts was, whether such predecretal arrangement could be pleaded in execution of the decree. They came to the conclusion that the appellant-judgment-debtor cannot so pl...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Bhimrao and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-04-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Mys239; 1963CriLJ293; (1963)1MysLJ148
T. K. Tukol, J.1. This is a reference made by the Sessions Judge, Bidar tinder Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, recommending that the order passed by the Munsiff-Magistrate, in Suit No. 261/5 of 1960 awarding a monthly maintenance of Rs. 30/- to the respondent be set aside on the ground that the ex parte order had been passed without proper service of summons. 2. It is quite clear from the different endorsements on the back of the summons issued to the petitioner who is the husband of the respondent, that on the first occasionwhen the Process Server went to the village, he had gone to Bagdal for election work while on the second occasion he had gone to attend a fair at Humanabad. The third summons bears the endorsement of the Process Server that the petitioner had gone to Gulbarga and that a copy had been therefore affixed to the house. We have now to see whether such service by affixing a copy of the summons to the house of the petitioner is valid service under the Code ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›