Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1976(2)KarLJ9
Venkataswami, J.1. This appeal under Section 96 of C. P. Code, is by defendants 2 and 3 and directed against the judgment and decree for possession of suit properties with mesne profits made in 0. S. No. 8 of 1968, by the 1st Additional Civil Judge at Mangalore, South Kanara District.(Contd. on col. 2)*(Against judgment and decree of 1st Addl. Civil J., Mangalore in 0. S. No. 8 of 1968). KRISHNA VAKKUNNAYYA | | Vasudeva I Sharnakarnvaana I2.The material facts giving rise to the appeal, briefly, are as follows:In order to appreciate the facts, it is necessary to set out the genealogical table showing the relationship of the plaintiff - 1st respondent to the last male owner of the suit properties.3. The parties are governed by the Hindu Mithakshara Law and the properties in suit were ancestral to Krishna IT, the father of the plaintiff. By virtue of a partition effect-d on 3-3-1909 (Ex. D-1), between Vasudeva IT and this brother, Krishna IT, the properties in respect of which the decree...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1976CriLJ1967
ORDERM.S. Nesargi, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the order dated 24-3-1976 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mandya, in Criminal Revision Petition No. 15 of 1974, holding that no relief could be granted in the said revision petition,2. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pandavapura, Sub-Division, Pandavapura, passed an order dated 16-9-1974 in Case No. C. Mis. 26 of 1969-70, holding that the respondents were in possession of the property in dispute. The proceeding before him had arisen under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner filed Criminal Revision Petition No. 15 of 1974 before the Sessions Judge, Mandya, challenging the said order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. The Sessions Judge has held that his powers of revision under Section 399 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could not be exercised as the records of the case had not been called for by himself from the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate...
Tag this Judgment!