Karnataka Court September 1997 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.
M/S. India Brewery and Distillery Limited, Bangalore Vs. J. Srinivas
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: ILR1998KAR110; 1998(1)KarLJ420
ORDER1. This revision is directed against the order of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, Mr. P.V. Singri, allowing the application filed by the accused under Section 210, Criminal Procedure Code and staying further investigation of the case referred to by the Court. Undisputed facts are these --That the petitioner has presented a private complaint under Section 200, Criminal Procedure Code before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, alleging offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 477A read with Section 34 of I.P.C. The complaint was made against its own employees including the accused.2. The learned Magistrate has referred the said complaint for investigation acting under Section 156(3), Criminal Procedure Code. The J.P. Nagar Police on receipt of this complaint, referred to by Court for investigation, registered a criminal case in Crime No. 4 of 1996 for the above said offences and the FIR was duly submitted to the...
Smt. G.K. Sowbhagya and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: ILR1999KAR804; 1998(1)KarLJ612
ORDER1. Assistant teachers who impart knowledge to the students in schools maintained and established by Karnataka University, Dharwad, are before this Court in a joint petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, questioning the legality or otherwise of the amendment made, Amending Statute No. 7 in Chapter VI of the University Statutes and notified by theChancellor of the University in exercise of the powers conferred on him by the Karnataka State Universities Act, 1976 (the 'Act' for short) as unconstitutional and void. Further, they are questioning the action of the University, retiring them on attaining the age of 58 years. 2. Since common facts are there and the question of law being the same in all these petitions, they are clubbed, heard and disposed of by this common order. 3. The representative matrix of facts which are admittedly similar, if not identical may be noticed briefly in present case. The petitioner began her career as Assistant Teacher in University Public...
M/S India Brewery and Distillery Ltd., Bangalore Vs. J. Srinivas
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ882
ORDER1. This revision is directed against the order of the IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, Mr. P. V. Singri, allowing the application filed by the accused under S. 210, Cr.P.C. and staying further investigation of the case referred to by the Court. Undisputed facts are these - That the petitioner has presented a private complaint under S. 200, Cr.P.C. before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, alleging offences punishable under Ss. 406, 408, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 477-A read with S. 34 of I.P.C. The complaint was made against its own employees including the accused. 2. The learned Magistrate has referred the said complaint for investigation acting under S. 156(3), Cr.P.C. The J.P. Nagar Police on receipt of this complaint, referred to by Court for investigation registered a criminal case in Crime No. 4/96 for the abovesaid offences and the FIR was duly submitted to the jurisdictional Magistrate. 3. After the matter was investigated, the J.P. Nagar Po...
Shree Hanumantha Devaru Vs. Munihanumantharayappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: ILR1998KAR141; 1997(4)KarLJ754
ORDERChidananda Ullal, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed by the Dharmadarshis of Sri Hanumantha Devaru temple situated at Jalahalli, Bangalore North Taluk, to quash the order dt. 26.7.82 passed by the Land Tribunal, Bangalore, (North) Taluk granting occupancy right in part in respect of three different extents of lands, 24 guntas to respondent No. 1, 18 guntas to respondent No. 2 and 24 guntas to respondent No. 3 (in all 1 acre 26 guntas) out of Sy.No. 73, Copy at Annexure 'A' to Writ Petition and further to quash the order dated 22.8.89 passed by the respondent No. 5 - District Land Reforms Appellants Authority, Bangalore Dist., whereby the said Appellate Authority while allowing the deemed appeal of the respondents No. 1 to 3 granted occupancy right to them in respect of the entire extents as claimed by respondents No. 1 to 3 by setting aside the order dt. 17.7.86 of the Land Tribunal, copy as at Annexure 'B' to Writ Petition.2. I heard the Learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri K. Gi...
Kommi Pradeep Babu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: ILR1998KAR365; 1997(4)KarLJ608
ORDERG.C. Bharuka, J.1. The thirteen petitioners herein are among the eighteen candidates whose admissions in the respondent Oxford Dental College, Bangalore, has been refused to be approved by the respondent bangalore University for the academic year 1995-96 under its communication dated 16.8.1996 (Annexure 'R2' to the statement of objections filed by the respondent University) on the ground that the admission capacity of the college for the year in question was only of 40 seats, whereas the admissions made were of 58 candidates, i.e., 18 in excess of the admission capacity approved by the Central Government under Section 10A of the Dentists Act, 1948 (in short, the 'Dentist Act').2. The present Writ Petition was filed on 24.8.1996 for issuance of a direction to the respondent University to treat the petitioners as bona fide students of Bachelor of Dental Surgery (in short, 'BDS') course of the respondent college for the academic year 1995-96. Their further prayer was that the respond...
Smt. Sakamma and ors. Vs. Sri Rangaiah, Since Deceased by His L.Rs. an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: ILR1998KAR672
T.N. vallinayagam, J.1. The L.Rs of the first plaintiff and plaintiffs 2 to 6 are the appellants. The suit for declaration of the plaintiff's title to the suit schedule properties and for injunction, was decreed by the trial Court. On appeal by the defendants, the decree was set aside by allowing the appeal and the suit was dismissed. Hence, the plaintiffs are before this Court in this second appeal.2. The facts relating to the second appeal are as follows:One Dasegowda had three sons by name Kempanna, Yelavaiah and Rangappa. The family tree of the said Dasegowda is appended below: Dase Gowda____________________________|___________________________| | |Kempanna Yelavaiah Rangappa| | |______|___________ | ______|______| | | | |Rangappa Gaviappa | Rangaiah Nanjappa@ G. Narasiah |Chikkarangappa |||Lakkamma(widow died in 1978|DaughterRangamma died in 1964Husband Huchaiah (died in 1973|____________________|______________________________Chikk- Lakkamma Nanjamma Dasegowda Hanumanthaiah- Chandm...
Smt. Sakamma Vs. Sri Rangaiah
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: ILR1998KAR1314
T.N. Vallinayagam, J.1.The L.Rs of the first plaintiff and plaintiffs 2 to 6 are the appellants. The suit for declaration of the plaintiffs' title to the suit schedule properties and for injunction, was decreed by the Trial Court. On appeal by the defendants, the decree was set aside by allowing the appeal and the suit was dismissed. Hence, the plaintiff's are before this Court in this second appeal.2. The facts relating to the second appeal are as follows:One Dasegowda had three sons by name Kempanna, Yelavaiah and Rangappa. The family tree of the said Dasegowda is appended below: Dase Gowda | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | | Kerpanna Yelavaiah Rangappa ---------------------- | ------------------- | | | | | Rangappa Goviappa | Rangaiah Nanjappa | @ G. Narasiah | Chikka | rangappa | Lakkamma (widow died in 1978) Daughter Rangamma died in 1964 Husband Huchaiah (died in 1973) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------...
Mohammadgouse Mattesab Yavagal Vs. Smt. Pramilabai Kom. Ganeshbhat Bal ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: 1998(5)KarLJ49
1. This second appeal is filed by defendant 1 against the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Haveri in R.A. No. 62 of 1992 dated 15-1-1994 reversing the judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsiff and JMFC, Hangal in O.S. No. 96 of 1983 dated 31-10-1992 in decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs for redemption of the suit property.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the respondents.3. For convenience sake, the appellant is referred to as defendant 1, respondent 1 as plaintiff 1, respondent 2 as defendant 2 and respondent 3 as plaintiff 3.4. The facts leading to this appeal are that the plaintiffs instituted suit for redemption of mortgage and for recovery of possession of the property and for mesne profits alleging that they are the owners of the property TPC No. 3190 comprising of two properties as detailed in the plaint. As per the contentions and allegations in the plaint, the suit property belonged to the plaintiff and defendant 2, and in a partition, ...
Srinivas G. Shet Vs. M/S. Manipal Finance Corporation Limited, Manipal
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-1997
Reported in: ILR1997KAR3238; 1998(1)KarLJ262
ORDER1. Heard the arguments of learned Counsel on both sides.2. The order dated 25-11-1993 of the Executing Court ordering issue of arrest warrant against petitioner judgment-debtor 4 is challenged by him in this revision.3. Indisputably, the decree under execution is the money decree. It was obtained against petitioner and three other judgment-debtors by the respondent herein. The notice of arrestcontemplated under sub-rule (1) of Rule 37 of Order 21 of Civil Procedure Code, was issued by the Court below and the same was returned duly served on the petitioner. When he remained absent in the execution proceeding on service of the said notice, the impugned order was passed against him.4. The proceedings recorded in the said order sheet of the Court below in Ex. Case No. 7 of 1991, do not disclose whether deposit of the subsistence allowance stipulated in sub-rule (1) of Rule 39 of Order 21 of Civil Procedure Code by the decree-holder for issuance of arrest warrant against petitioner. Or...
Smt. B.L.R. Mani Vs. the General Manager, Bangalore Telephones and ors ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)KarLJ663
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. The petitioner is the subscriber of Telephone No. 3300170, which is provided as a STD/ISD/PCO. She was served with two bills dated 15-8-1992 and 1-9-1992 (Annexure-B and C) for Rs. 13,455/- and Rs. 14,236/- respectively for the periods 25-7-1992 to 10-8-1992 and 10-8-1992 to 25-8-1992. According to her, the billing of calls made from her telephone (STD/PCO) was computerised and the computer print-out showed that the amount due for the calls made during those periods were only Rs. 6,421/- and Rs. 7,139/-. She, therefore, contended that the bills were excessive and filed Writ Petition No. 28127 of 1992 challenging the said bills. This Court directed reference of the dispute to arbitration under Section 7-B of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and accordingly the dispute relating to the said bills was referred to arbitration to the third respondent. The Arbitrator, after hearing the parties, has passed a reasoned award dated 27-4-1994, (Annexure-A) holding that the two bill...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »