Karnataka Court June 1987 Judgments

Anjanappa Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR2326; 1987(2)KarLJ201

ORDER1. This is a Revision Petition under section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code for short) and is directed against the order dated 9-4-1985 made by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Chitradurga Sub-Division, in MAG. CR 7(D)/1984-85 on his file. 2. The facts, as they appear in the record, necessary to dispose of the present petition, are these : Anjanappa, son of Gidda Hanumanthappa, the petitioner, is a resident of Barageri Colony on Davangere Road in the limits of the City of Chitradurga. The Circle Inspector of Police, Chitradurga Circle, on 4-6-1984 registered a case against the petitioner in Crime No. 55/84 under Section 56(d) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 (the Act for short). The allegation in the complaint lodged by the Circle Inspector of Police, on behalf of the State was that the petitioner moving on public roads, frequented by the members of the public was beckoning the members of the public to play Mataka gambling. The further allega...

Mahboob Pasha Vs. Syed ZaheeruddIn and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1988Kant83; ILR1987KAR2830; 1987(2)KarLJ57

Bopanna, J.1. This is a defendants appeal against the judgment and decree of the VI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, in 0. S. No. 10373 of 1980 dt. 19-3-1986 decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs for specific performance of the agreement of sale of immovable property dt. 10-8-1974 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiffs and for other incidental reliefs.2. On service of notice regarding admission, the respondents entered appearance through a counsel. Thereafter the appeal came up for admission on 15-61987. As it appeared to us that the issue relating to limitation had not been prima facie decided correctly, it was made known to the learned counsel appearing for the parties that the appeal would be heard on the point of limitation as to whether the suit was filed in time. Accordingly, at request, the appeal was adjourned to 22-6-1987. Again on 22-6-1987, it was adjourned to today. The appeal was taken up for hearing in the forenoon to hear the learned counsel on ...

Government of Karnataka Vs. M.R. Thammaiah

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR3538

P.P. Bopanna, J.1. This appeal by the State Government is directed against the judgment and decree of Civil Judge, Coorg, in O.S No.9 of 1971 dated 14-4-1975 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for Rs. 2,21,451/-. Though the suit claim is for a very heavy amount, the facts of this case are quite simple and do not admit of much controversy.2. The parties are referred here by the position assigned to them in the trial Court.3. The 1st defendant, i.e., the State of Mysore, under the Notification dated 11-4-1969 published in Mysore Gazette Extraordinary of even date called for tenders for leasing the right of retail vending of liquors in Kodagu District. The terms and conditions of retail vending are found in the Gazette Notification Ex. P-9. The relevant Clause for the purpose of this case is Clause 18(b)(1). In pursuance of the said Notification, the plaintiff participated in the auction sale conducted by the 2nd defendant/Deputy Commissioner Of Kodagu who is also the District Excise Off...

G. Lakshman Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR2177

ORDERBopanna, J.1. The petitioner has questioned the correctness of the order passed by the Government of Karnataka (Home Department) refusing to renew the four licenses held by him which were valid up to 31-12-1984. It is not in dispute that these licenses were granted to him to enable him to carry on business in the manufacture and sale of Fire Arms under the name and style of 'Dwaraka Arms Stores' situate at Sathyanarayanapet, Bellary. The State Government being the Renewal Authority under the Arms Act, 1959 (in short the Act), the petitioner made an application for the renewal of these licenses in accordance with the provisions of Section 15 of the Act. The State Government made an order on 13-12-1985 rejecting his application for renewal. This order was challenged by the petitioner in W. P. No. 19681 of 1985 and this Court by its Order dated 16-7-1986 set aside the said order on the short ground that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of being heard before the said ord...

Muniswamappa Vs. Nagamma

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR2280

ORDERNavadgi, J.1. In this Revision Petition filed under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code for short), the five petitioners, who have been ordered to be impleaded as respondents Nos. 2 to 6 in C. Misc No 141/81 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, V Court, Bangalore City, Bangalore, have challenged the order dated 2-2-1985 made by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate allowing the application (I.A.I) to implead them in C. Misc. No. 141/81.2. The facts relevant to dispose of the Petition are these : Nagamma the respondent, the mother of petitioners 1 to 5 has filed an application before the Learned Magistrate on 17-9-1981 claiming maintenance allowance from her husband Kadirappa, who is not impleaded in the present Revision Petition. The respondent examined herself on 27-11-1982 in support of the claim and adduced the evidence of one witness on 19-3-1983. Kadirappa, the husband of respondent, was examined on two dates, i.e., on 19-3-1983 and 2-8-1983. The Lear...

State of Karnataka Vs. G. Lakshman

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR2223

Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. This appeal is by the State of Karnataka, which is the respondent in W.P. No. 16532/1986. The parties will be referred with reference to their rankings in the Writ Petition for the sake of convenience. The Learned Single Judge has issued a Writ directing the renewal of four licences issued to the petitioner earlier, under the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959 (shortly called 'the Act'). The facts in brief, which are summarised by the Learned Single Judge may be repeated hereinafter :2. The petitioner questioned the correctness of the order passed by the Government of Karnataka (Home Department) refusing to renew the four licences held by him which were valid upto 31-12-1984. It is not in dispute that these licences were granted to him to enable him to carry on business in the manufacture and sale of fire arms Stores situate at Sathyanarayanapet, Bellary. The Government being the Renewal Authority under the Act, the petitioner made an application for the renewal o...

Lingamma Vs. Regional Transport Officer

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR3307

ORDERVenkatachala, J.1. By consent of Learned Counsel, this Writ Petition is treated as having been posted for hearing and I have heard them.2. The Petitioner is the registered owner of the motor vehicle bearing registration No. MYN 4882. Since that vehicle was one for which a special permit had been issued under Section 63(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, quarterly advance tax payable thereto under Item 6(a) of Part-A of the Schedule to the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act') for the period from 1-5-1986 to 31-7-1986, had been paid. That vehicle was, however, altered as a stage carriage with effect from 27-6-1986 making it liable for tax at a lower rate as provided for in Item 4(4)(a) of Part-A of the Schedule to the Act. That vehicle being used from 27-6-1986 to 31-7-1986 as a stage carriage, the petitioner made a claim before the Regional Transport Officer, Mysore (respondent-1) for refund of tax paid earlier by her for the vehicle as provided for in...

M. Lakshminarayana Reddy Vs. the Union of India and ors.

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. Petitioner arraigned on an indictment for violation of S. 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 (Act No. 22 of 1955) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), has sought (i) to declare it as void and ultra vires in so far as it categorizes certain acts as offences arising out of untouchability and (ii) to quash criminal proceedings including F.I.R. etc. 2. Petitioner and fifth respondent are in the services of K.E.B. working at Mulabagal. Dissatisfaction on the transfer of fifth respondent from Mulabagal to Malur and/or delayed handing over of charge appears to have resulted in some altercation on 21-7-1982; it is alleged that petitioner and four others used abusive language calling fifth respondent as 'Holiya', Madiga' and so on, as detailed in F.I.R. (Annexure-D). Fourth respondent on receipt of the complaint from the fifth respondent has registered a case under Section 7 of the Act. Petitioner pleads innocence, and denies the incident. Petitioner contends that it is a ...

Chikkabyatagaiah Vs. A. Gopala Rao and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1988Kant89; 1987(2)KarLJ322

ORDER1. The above revision petition is directed against the order dated 5th July, 1980 passed by the Additional Munsiff, Civil Station, Bangalore, in Execution Case No. 48/1980. 2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows: That the petitioner who was a vendor filed execution petition in the above Court. The decree-holder obtained a compromise decree for the Specific Performance of contract against the judgment-debtor in O.S. No. 104/78 and has brought this decree for execution. Before filing this execution petition, the judgment debtor. had previously filed Execution Petition No. 8/77 and that was dismissed. In this Execution Petition No.,48/80 the decree holder prays for a direction to the judgment debtor to execute the sale deed in terms of the decree. Along with this petition the decree-holder has filed an application under S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying that the Execution Court may be pleased to order that the decree-holder should deposit the balance of the sal...

Anand Steels Vs. Bharath Earth Movers Limited

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1989]65CompCas427(Kar); 1987(2)KarLJ52

M.P. Chandrakantharaj Urs, J.1. This company petition under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956, is by M/s. Anand Steels, Bangalore. It is a proprietary concern that has moved this court for a winding-up order seeking the winging up of the respondent, Bharath Earth Movers Ltd., Bangalore. 2. The substance of the allegations in the petition is that on various dates commencing from October 9, 1985, to December 4, 1985, certain supplies of steel effected in respect of which a sum of Rs. 13,67,697 was due and liable to be paid by the respondent-company. The same was not paid despite more than one notice issued. The petitioner was informed that goods worth about Rs. 45,405 was rejected by the respondent-company. Therefore, the petitioner is seeking payment of Rs. 13,22,292 together with interest at 18% per annum from July, 1, 1986, up to the date of petition. It is in that circumstance, for non-payment of the cost of materials supplied, the petition is filed, inter alia, contending th...