Karnataka Court June 1995 Judgments

Hanamanth Ramanna Alias Ramachandra Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1995CriLJ4218; ILR1995KAR2158; 1995(3)KarLJ461

Mirdhe, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant-accused against the Judgment dt. 22-7-94 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Bijapur, in S.C. No. 145/93 convicting the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 302, IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/accused Sri. R. B. Deshpande and the learned Addl. Government Pleader Sri Rajagopal and perused the records of the case. 3. The case of the prosecution is as follows : That deceased Huchawwa was the wife of the appellant-accused. The accused was residing at Bagalkot, whereas the deceased was residing separately from her husband/accused in Bijapur in the house of P.W. 2, the complainant. She had obtained an order of maintenance against the accused and the accused was required to pay the arrears of maintenance amounting to Rs. 6,000/- to her. Therefore, the accused was nursing a grudge against her. The deceased was living in that house with her daught...

Corporation of the City of Bangalore Vs. Venkatapathy Setty

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1995KAR2615; 1995(4)KarLJ238

Saldanha, J. 1. Heard learned Advocates on both sides. The Corporation of the City of Bangalore has appealed against the decree passed by the learned trial Judge in these two suits. The operative part of the order reads as follows:-'Plaintiff's suit is decreed against defendants, restraining them from demolishing the construction on the suit schedule property, subject to condition that plaintiff has to approach the Standing Committee, as provided under Section 320(2) and Section 444 of the K.M.C. Act, on or before 15th March, 1994, for reddressal. (Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in open court, this the 31st day of January, 1994).' 2. The appellants' learned Counsel submits that the Corporation had pleaded before the trial Court that within the scheme of the law, it was incumbent upon the plaintiffs to project whatever grievances they had or to apply for whatever reliefs they desire to the Standing Committee. Admittedly, this had no...

Venkappa Kannappa Chowdari Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1996CriLJ15; ILR1995KAR2149; 1995(6)KarLJ544

Mirdhe, J. 1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant-accused against the Judgment dated 20-10-1994 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Bijapur, in S.C. No. 95/1994 convicting the appellant-accused for the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. We have heard Sri S. G. Rajendra Reddy appearing for Sri R. B. Deshpande, learned Counsel for the appellant, and Sri M. Rajagopal, learned Additional Government Pleader, for the respondent-State fully and perused the records of the case. 3. The case of the prosecution is as follows : Deceased Sumithra, who was aged about 30 years at the time of her death, was the wife of the appellant-accused. They were living with their two children in a house in Gaddanakeri Cross. The accused was working as a waterman in the Panchayat. But, he was addicted to drinking liquor and, therefore, there used to be quarrels between the deceased and the accused often. About two years prior to the incident, ...

H.J. Gurnath (Dr.) Vs. Chairman and the Disciplinary Authority, Cauver ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1995KAR2933; 1996(1)KarLJ84

ORDERTirath S. Thakur, J.1. This writ petition was fixed today for orders on IAI for vacation of stay, filed by the respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition itself was heard for final disposal.2. The petitioner is working as an officer in the respondent - Cauvery Grameena Bank. Certain disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against him in terms of a charge-sheet dated 28.12.1994. The conduct of the enquiry has been entrusted to respondent 2 by the Chairman of the Bank, in terms of his letter dated 6th April, 1995. The second respondent has accordingly issued a notice dated 15th April, 1995, calling upon the petitioner to attend the enquiry proceedings to be held on 25th April, 1995 and on subsequent dates and also to file a list of documents and witnesses on which he may seek to rely.3. Aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned notice issued by the second respondent as also...

Vimala Vs. Narayanaswamy

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1995KAR3376

Saldanha, J. 1. Certain interesting facets of the law relating to the conferring of a gift within the framework of the Transfer of Property Act have been canvassed in this pair of Appeals and require to be resolved. There is on record a document dated 26,11.1945. That was executed in relation to the property in dispute by deceased Sadamma. On the date of execution of that document, the admitted position was that all her children except two daughters by the name of Sharadamma and Rajamma had died. The document in question though it is in Kannada was admittedly executed by the deceased and is on record. It is in relation to certain clauses in this document that the entire controversy has arisen for which purpose I propose to summarise the significant provisions that were contained therein.2. The recitals in the document are to the effect that only two of Sadamma's children namely Sharadamma and Rajamma were alive as on the date of execution of that document. No reference is made to the l...

Dr. H.J. Gurunath Vs. Cauvery Grameena Bank, Mysore and Another

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. This writ petition was fixed today for orders on IAI for vacation of stay, filed by the respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition itself was heard for final disposal.2. The petitioner is working as an Officer in the respondent- Cauvery Grameena Bank. Certain disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against him in terms of a charge-s eet dated December 28, 1994. The conduct of the enquiry has been entrusted to Respondent No 2 by the Chairman of the Bank, in tennis of his letter dated April 6, 1995. The second respondent has accordingly issued a notice dated April 15, 1995, calling upon the petitioner to attend the enquiry proceedings to be held on April, 25, 1996 and on subsequent dates and also to file of documents and witnesses on which he may seek to rely.3. Aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned notice issued by the second respondent as also the order passed by t...

Shivappa Vs. Keriyamma

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1996KAR263; 1995(5)KarLJ415

Hari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This is defendants' Second Appeal arising out of the judgment and decree dated 17.11.1987 delivered by the Civil Judge, Sagar, in R.A.No. 40/83 whereby the first Appellate Court, namely the Civil Judge, Sagar, set aside the judgment and decree dated 30.7.1983 passed by the Principal Munsiff, Sagar, in O.C.No. 209/81 whereby the Munsiff had dismissed the plaintiff's suit. The first Appellate Court decreed the plaintiff's suit holding that the plaintiff is entitled to 1/3rd share in the suit properties and for partition being effected by metes and bounds and for delivery of separate possession of her share. The first Appellate Court further directed that as regards mesne profits, an enquiry shall be made by the Trial Court in respect of the 1/3rd share of the plaintiff from the date of suit till the date of delivery of possession.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the plaintiff/respondent Smt. Keriyamma filed a suit claiming the following reliefs:-(a) For ...

Radhamma Vs. Lakshmamma K. Murthy

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1995KAR3249; 1995(4)KarLJ145

M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This Appeal raises an interesting issue which has been very vigorously contested and which may briefly be summarised as follows. It has become quite prevalent in several of the acquisitions undertaken in and around the City of Bangalore for parties to represent to the concerned authorities that for a variety of reasons the acquired properties be reconveyed to them. Without commenting on either the propriety or the wisdom involved in many of these decisions, quite apart from the public interest angle where it is presumed that the original acquisition was a responsibly well considered action on which considerable amount of public finance has been expended, the issue that really arises is the question as to whether such acts of reconveyance are to be construed as conferring enforceable rights. That issue has directly arisen in this Appeal in so far as the dispute which concerns a plot of land or better described as a site No. 3971 which is situated at 17th 'E' Cross, 3...

Rajappa Vs. Somappa

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1995KAR3275; 1995(6)KarLJ737

ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This is the defendants' Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure from the judgment and decree dated 6.8.1984 passed by Sri K.R. Prasad Rao, the Principal Civil Judge, Kolar in Regular Civil Appeal No. 26/1983, whereby the learned lower Appellate Court viz., the learned Principal Civil Judge allowed the plaintiff's appeal and set aside the judgment and decree dated 29.9.1983 passed by the Principal Munsiff, Kolar in Original Suit No. 241/1979 and decreed the plaintiff's claim for declaration and injunction. Before I proceed further I may mention it here that although this matter had been listed on three days and appellants' Counsel argued and heard the matter and waited for the respondent's Counsel but none appeared to argue the matter on behalf of the respondent. After conclusion of the arguments for the learned Counsel for appellants I proceeded to decide the Appeal in absence of respondent's Counsel.2. The facts of the case in brie...

The State of Karnataka Vs. Revappa Alias Mudakappa

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1996CriLJ182; ILR1995KAR2139; 1995(3)KarLJ451

Mirdhe, J. 1. This criminal appeal is preferred by the State against the judgment dated 27-1-1993 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bijapur, in S.C. No. 86/1991 acquitting the respondent-accused of the offence punishable under S. 302, I.P.C. 2. We have heard the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Sri A. B. Patil and the learned counsel for the respondent-accused Sri S. G. Rajendra Reddy fully and perused the records of the case. 3. The case of the prosecution is as follows : PW 1 is the father of deceased Khajibai. Khajibai was eking out his livelihood by selling omelet's near the Mandal Panchayath office. The accused had taken Rs. 40/- as hand-loan from him. On 14-7-1991 at 8.00 p.m. deceased Khajibai was doing his business of preparing omelet's and selling them near the Mandal Panchayath office and at that time, the accused came there. The deceased asked him to return back the amount taken by him as loan as the deceased was in financial difficulties. The accused felt i...