Karnataka Court May 1991 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.
Trustees for the Improvement of City of Bangalore (Citb) Vs. I.B.M. Wo ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-27-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR3867; 1991(2)KarLJ320
K.A. Swami, J.1. This Appeal by the defendant is preferred against the Judgment and decree dated 28-2-1979 passed by the learned VII Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore City in O.S. No. 284/1975. 2. The trial Court has decreed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,05,098/- with proportionate costs and current interest at 6% per annum on Rs. 2,05,098/- from the date of suit till the date of realisation. 3. The respondent-plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,16,387/- from the defendant. The said sum was made up as follows: 1) Amount paidon 7-10-1975Rs. 1,99,914-00Interest there on at 12% from 7-10-1975 till dateRs. 10,995-422) Amount paidon 9-12-1974Rs. 5,184-00Interest thereon at 12% from 9-12-1975 till dateRs. 293-59TotalRs. 2,16,387-01However, the trial Court has disallowed the interest as claimed by the plaintiff and has decreed the suit for a sum of Rs. 2,05,098/-. 4. The case of the plaintiff was that it had owned vast area measuring 67 acres 10 1/2 gun...
Nyatha Reddy Vs. Chengamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-19-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR3260
B. Jagannatha Hegde, J. 1. This Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 9-3-1990 passed in R.A. No. 33/1987 on the file of the Civil Judge, K.G.F. 2. Respondent filed a suit in O.S. No. 447/1975 before the Munsiff at K.G.F., for declaration of his title and possession of the suit property. The suit was dismissed on 28-9-1987. Respondent filed an appeal against this order of dismissal in R.A. No. 33/1987 before the Civil Judge at K.G.F. The learned Civil Judge, after hearing the appeal set aside the Judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsiff and remanded the entire matter for fresh disposal in accordance with law. This Judgment is challenged by the Appellants in this appeal. 3. One Munireddy, had two daughters by name Muniyamma and Gangamma. Muniyamma was the wife of Munireddy. Gangamma's husband was Varadareddy. Respondent (plaintiff) is the daughter of Gangamma and Varadareddy. Appellants are the brothers of Munireddy, the husband of Muniyamma...
M/S. Dasappa and Brothers, Bangalore and Etc. Etc. Vs. Election Commis ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-18-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Kant230; 1992(1)KarLJ152
ORDERVenkatachala, J. 1. These are common writ petitions filed under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution by six partnership firms, which arc Excise Contractors in the State of Karnataka, impugning the validity of a Teleprinter Message (Annexure-A), which reads :'To : The Deputy Commissioners of all Districts except Bangalore and Bangalore Rural Districts. From : The Chief Electoral Officer, Karnataka, Bangalore. No. DPAR 4 CHU MA NI 91.-- Election Commission in their message No. 576/14/91 / 9273 dated 14-5-1991 regarding prohibition of sale of liquor during election period has since directed as follows : (.) Quote (.) The ban on sale of liquor shall come into force with effect from 18th May 1991 and shall remain in force till repeat (repealed) till the date of completion of election in the State (.) These instructions apply uniformly in respect of all States irrespective of the date of which polltakes place (.) It is further clarified that in case the date Of completion of election i...
Dasappa and Brothers Vs. Election Commission
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-18-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR3038
ORDERVenkatachala, J. 1. These are common Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by six partnership firms, which are Excise Contractors in the State of Karnataka, impugning the validity of a Teleprinter Message (Annexure-A), which reads: 'To The Deputy Commissioner of alt Districts except Bangalore and Bangalore Rural Districts. From The Chief Electoral Officer, Karnataka, Bangalore. No. DPAR 4 CHU MA NI 91 - Election Commission in their message No. 576/14/91/9273 dated 14-5-1991 regarding prohibition of sale of liquor during election period has since directed as follows: (.) Quote (.) The ban on sale of liquor shall come into force with effect from 18th May 1991 and shall remain in force till repeat till the date of completion of election in the State (.) These instructions apply uniformly in respect of all States irrespective of the date of which poll lakes place (.) It is further clarified that in case the date of completion of election in any cons...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›