Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2000(4)KarLJ145
ORDER1. The argument of learned Counsel for petitioner Sri Ramachandra Reddy was heard. The argument of respondent's learned Counsel could not be heard as he did not choose to be present when the matter was taken up for hearing.2. The petitioner who is the accused in Cri. Case No. 16209 of 1995 on the complaint of respondent made before the learned Magistrate on15-12-1994 alleging commission of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('the Act' for short) has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. praying to quash criminal proceeding against him before the learned Magistrate on the ground that the cognizance of the offence taken by him by his order dated 1-3-1995 was illegal and without jurisdiction in the absence of proof of the date on which the complainant's demand notice under Section 138(c) of the Act was stated to have been issued by complainant's Advocate.3. The certified copy of the order sheet of the Court below in the said C.C. No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1998KAR1976
T.N. Vallinayagam, J.1. R.S.A. itself was taken up for final disposal.2. Plaintiff is the appellant. His suit for declaration of ownership and possession apart from mandatory injunction to pull down the construction unlawfully made by the defendant was decreed by the Trial Court including the prayer for Mandatory Injunction. But the Appellate Court while confirming the decree of the Trial Court thought fit to remit the matter holding that the plaintiff will be satisfied if damages are paid by the defendant for the encroached portion. Against that order, of the first Appellate Court, plaintiff is before this Court.3. The facts of the case are -The appellant filed that suit for declaration that he is the owner of the suit schedule property and for delivery of vacant possession of the suit schedule property and for mandatory injunction to pull down the construction made by the respondent in the encroached area of about 3 guntas in the land of the plaintiff-appellant in Sy.No. 17 of Sindgh...
Tag this Judgment!