Karnataka Court June 1967 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.
G.S. Kalburgi Vs. the Commissioner for Transport in Mysore and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-30-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant257; AIR1968Mys257; (1967)2MysLJ267
ORDER(1) The petitioner is the owner of a motor vehicle which was checked by a Superintendent of Police when it was performing the journey on a road known as the Kolhar Bilgi road. The Superintendent made a report that when he asked the petitioner's driver for the production of the permit, it was not produced. After this checking was done on October 28, 1964, a notice was issued to the petitioner on December 19, 1964, asking him to show cause why the registration certificate of the vehicle should not be suspended under Section 33(1)(b) of the Motor Vehicle Act.(2) The Petitioner, through his communication addressed to the Regional Transport Authority, who had issued that notice to him, denied that he had committed any act which would justify the suspension of the registration certificate and pleaded that although a permit had been granted earlier, it had not been issued. The Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority who was the Registering Authority within the meaning of Section 33...
Kitti Alias Kittaraju and anr. Vs. Thammaiah Setty and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-30-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Kant243; AIR1967Mys243
ORDER1. This petition is directed against the Order made by the learned Sessions Judge.Chikmagalur, in Cr. R. P. No. 17 of 1966 on his file, on 24-10-1966. The learned Sessions Judge by his order has set aside the order of discharge made by the learned Munsiff-Magistrate, Chikmagalur, in C. C. No. 1008/65. It has also directed that the accused, the present revision petitioners should be arrested and a fresh enquiry be held in the manner prescribed by law under Section 207-A Cr. P C. He has further directed that the Magistrate should direct the police concerned to submit a charge sheet against the concerned accused persons.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this application are briefly as follows: One Thammaiah Setty, a resident of Chikmagalur Town, lodged a complaint against the present revision petitioners namely Kitti and Jagga, who were also the residents of Chikmagalur Town. The allegations in the said complaint were that the complainant and the accused were neighbouring cult...
T. Mahalaxmiamma and ors. Vs. N.S. Radhakrishna Rao and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-28-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant229; AIR1968Mys229; (1967)2MysLJ446
Kalagate, J.(1) These three appeals arise out of the decision in Original Suit No. 79 of 1958, instituted by the plaintiffs in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of South Kanara, for partition and possession of their one-third share in the suit schedule property.(2) Regular Appeal No. 209 of 1961 is by defendants 7 to 11, and it relates to items 2 and 3 of the plaint 'A' schedule, whereas Regular Appeal No. 217 of 1961 is by defendants 2 to 5, and it is confined to certain items of investment claimed by defendant 2 as his separate properties, and Regular Appeal No. 223/61 is by defendant 6, and his claim therein is the same as that claimed in R. A. 209/61.(3) We shall first deal with Regular Appeal No. 209 of 1961 which, as stated already, relates to items 2 and 3 of the plaint 'A' schedule properties. Before I set out the plaintiffs' case in relation to those properties, it will be convenient if I state the relationship of the parties as stated in the plaint.(4) Defendant 1 is the fat...
Belgaum Borough Municipality by Its Prosecutor D.S. Sadre Vs. Shridhar ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-27-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Mys196; 1968CriLJ952; ILR1967KAR1156; (1967)2MysLJ299
Hombe Gowda, C.J. (1) The respondents were prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 16(1)(A)(I) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act on the allegation that on 31-12-1964 at about 2 p.m. they were found to have stored adulterated safflower oil (Kusumba) in their shop in house No. 655 at Raviwar Peth, Belgaum and that the first respondent sold and that the second respondent caused to be sold 360 milliliters of that adulterated safflower oil to the Food Inspector Sri Mendoza, in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate. First Class, Belgaum City. In answer to the charged framed under Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act both the Respondents stated that they had not committed the offence. The Prosecutor led evidence to prove that the first respondent sold safflower oil to the Food Inspector of Belgaum City on 31-12-1964 and that the second respondent caused the same to be sold. The Food Inspector who purchased 360 milli litres of safflower oi...
P. Janakiram Chetty Vs. Punjab National Bank Ltd. and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant56; AIR1968Mys56; (1967)2MysLJ168
(1) Defendant 2 is the appellant. The first respondent-Bank obtained a decree on 31st January 1964 against two defendants for a sum of Rs. 29,720-06. The first defendant accepted the decree and has not filed an appeal. The second defendant, however, has preferred this appeal challenging the correctness of the said decree against him.(2) The plaintiff-the Punjab National Bank Ltd. (which hereafter shall be referred to as the Bank) instituted O. S. No. 23 of 1959 in the Court of the Principal District Judge, Mysore, against two defendants to recover a sum of Rs. 38,203-01 due from them. It is the case of the plaintiff that it is a banking company, duly registered under the Indian Companies Act, having its head office at Delhi and two of its branches at Bangalore and Mysore. The defendants are merchants of Mysore and are also Directors of the Kapila Textile Mills, Ltd., Nanjangud, Mysore District (now in liquidation).The Kapila Textile mills, Ltd., hereafter shall be referred to as the Mi...
Doddayya Vs. State of Mysore and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1967
Reported in: (1968)ILLJ794Kant
ORDERSanthosh, J.1. In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for quashing the order of respondent 3, dated 1 May, 1964, terminating his services as head cooly. He also prays for an appropriate writ or order directing respondent 3 to reinstate him in the Public Works Department of the Government of Mysore, in preference to respondents 4 to 17. There is also a prayer for quashing the reinstatement of respondents 4 to 13. 2. In his affidavit, the petitioner states that he was appointed as a gang-workman in the year 1946 in the Public Works Department. He worked in that capacity till 30 September, 1960 and was duly given increments every year. Thereafter, he was appointed as head cooly on 30 September, 1960 on a salary of Rs. 60 per month. A service register showing him as an employee in the Public Works Department was also opened on 28 July, 1960. On 1 May, 1964, respondent 3 terminated his services as also of respondents 4 to 13 as per Ex. A. The complain...
Doddaiah Vs. State of Mysore by Its Chief Secretary, Vidhana Soudha, B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Kant223; AIR1967Mys223; [1967(15)FLR311]; ILR1967KAR1150
Santhosh, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for quashing the order of respondent 3, dated 1-5-1964 terminating his services as Head Cooly. He also prays for an appropriate writ or order directing the third respondent to reinstate him in the Public Works Department of the Government of Mysore, in preference to respondents 4 to 17. There is also a prayer for quashing the reinstatement of respondents 4 to 132. In his affidavit, the petitioner states that he was appointed as a Gang-Workman in the year 1946 in the Public Works Department He worked in that capacity till 30-9-1960 and was duly given increments every year. Thereafter he was appointed as Head Cooly on 30-9-1960 on a salary of Rs. 60 per month A service register showing him as an employer in the Public Works Department was also opened on 287-1960 On 1-5-1964, the third respondent terminated his services as also of respondents 4 to 13 as per Exhibit A.The complaint of the petitioner...
President and Directors of the Agricultural Produce Co-operative Marke ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1967
Reported in: 1969CriLJ701
ORDERAhmed Ali Khan, J.1. The First Class Magistrate of Mercara in Crl.C.No. 78 of 1965 on the file of his Court holding that the complaint filed by the petitioner was unsustainable, discharged the accused who are the respondents in this revision petition under Section 253(1) of the Crl.P.C. by his order dated the 27th December 1965.2. The Sessions Judge in a revision filed before him by the petitioner against the order of the discharge, confirmed the order of the Magistrate and dismissed the revision petition. It is against that order that the petitioner has come up in revision before this Court.3. It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that the lower Court was not right in holding that the complaint was not filed by Varadaraja Shetty, the President of the Agricultural Produce Co-operative Marketing Society, Limited, in his individual capacity. It was also strongly urged that even otherwise if the complaint petition is construed to have been filed by the Co-operative Marketing Soci...
R. Narayana Swamy and anr. Vs. State of Mysore by Its Chief Secretary, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant189; AIR1968Mys189
ORDER(1) In these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the validity of Rules made by the Government for admission of Licentiates to the condensed M.B.B.S. course has been challenged. The two petitioners in these petitions were applicants for admission to the condensed M.B.B.S. course and they were not selected.(2) In April 1966, the Government framed Rules for admission tot he Condensed M.B.B.S. course in the Government Medical Colleges in the State and these Rules are in supersession of the earlier rules framed by Government in this behalf Clause 2 of these Rules states that these Rules shall apply for selection of candidates for ninety seats (thirty in each of the three Medical Colleges in Bangalore, Hubli and Mysore)(3) Rule 4 of these Rules reads:'4. Reservations (1): 90 per cent of the seats shall be reserved for persons in Mysore Government Service and the remaining seats shall be reserved for others, out of which one seat shall be reserved for a nominee of the Centra...
R.P. Muniswamappa Vs. Eramma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant8; AIR1968Mys8; (1967)2MysLJ44
(1) In Hindu Marriage Miscellaneous Case No. 145 of 1965, the appellant made an application under section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called 'the Act') for the grant of a decree of judicial separation against the respondent In these proceedings the respondent made an application under section 24 of the Act seeking interim maintenance pendente lite at Rupees 500/- p.m. and Rs.500/- towards expenses of the litigation. This petition was objected to by the petitioner and after recording evidence, the Civil Judge made an Order on 4th December 1956 directing the petitioner to pay an interim maintenance of Rs. 300/- p.m. and Rs. 500/- towards the expenses of the litigation. The petitioner had alleged that Respondent was getting a rent of Rs.50/- from one of properties in her possession. The Civil Judge directed the deduction of a sum of Rs. 60/- from the sum of Rs.300/- provided the petitioner did not prevent the respondent from getting the said rent. This is admittedly an...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »