Karnataka Court April 2000 Judgments
M.B. Ponnappa Vs. State of Karnataka and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-04-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR4000; 2000(6)KarLJ589
ORDER1. Government Pleader is directed to take notice.2. Heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleaderfor the State.3. The petitioner who is an accused in CC No. 130 of 1995 on the file of J.M.F.C., Madikeri for offences under Sections 189, 332 and 506(1) of the IPC was released on bail on 20-2-1995 at the investigation stage with conditions. Later conditions of bail were relaxed and the petitioner was directed to appear before Court on being summoned. On a final report being filed, summons were issued to the accused. The accused petitioner claims that on account of mental illness, he could not appear before Court, being treated in different hospitals at Mysore, Bangalore, Udupi and the NIMHANS, Bangalore and in Kerala. Meanwhile, the sureties being unable to trace and produce the accused, paid the penalty imposed on them by the Court. The case was transferred to the long pending case register, with no immediate prospect of apprehension of the petitioner. A non-bailab...
Tag this Judgment!C. Thyagarajan and anr. Vs. Corporation of the City of Bangalore and o ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-04-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ1282
V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus or direction directing the respondent No. 1 Corporation to pay a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 as compensation to the petitioners towards the loss of the life of their only son Karthik Babu urging various facts and legal contentions.2. The brief facts of the case are stated as hereunder. The respondent No. 1, hereinafter called as the Corporation in short is the owner of the swimming pool situated in Jayanagar, 4th Block which is open to public on paying requisite entry fee. The Corporation has given the said swimming pool to the respondent No. 2 after inviting tenders to manage the said swimming pool for a specified period to collect necessary entry fee from the persons who have to swim in the swimming pool. The respondent No. 2 is actually in charge of the swimming pool on day-to-day basis. The respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are the Instructor and the Assistant Instructor appointed by the r...
Tag this Judgment!Paramashivaiah and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-03-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR4830; 2001(1)KarLJ442
1. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Single Judge dismissing the writ petitions (Paramashivaiah and Others v State of Karnataka) thereby confirming the order Annexure-L passed by the Land Tribunal, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), rejecting the claim for conformant of occupancy right in respect of land measuring 26 acres 29 guntas in Sy. Nos. 72, 73, 74, 75, 82 and 83 of Chikkayellur Village, Tavarekere Hobli, Magadi Taluk, the appellants have come up in these appeals.2. Facts:Basavaiah alias Basavegowda, father and predecessor in interest of the appellants was the owner of the land bearing Sy. Nos. 72, 73, 74, 75, 82 and 83 in all measuring 26 acres 29 guntas. He agreed to sell the land in favour of one Hanumayya (now deceased), father and predecessor in interest of respondents 3(a) to (h) by an agreement of sale dated 10th of February, 1966. Since the said Basavaiah refused to execute the sale deed in pursuance to the agreement of sale,...
Tag this Judgment!B.H. Rangaiah Vs. H.R.V. Basavaraju and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-03-2000
Reported in: II(2000)ACC595; 2001ACJ348; AIR2000Kant324; ILR2000KAR1803; 2000(4)KarLJ262
V.P. Mohan Kumar, J.1. This case illustrates the consequence of the apathy being displayed by the Courts in claims for motor accident compensation. The Courts have been lenient whenever a victim of a motor accident approaches the Court and taking note of the injuries sustained by the claimants award just compensation. But, now it is discovered that it is exceeding the limits and the apathy of the Court is being exploited. The present case from which the appeal is preferred is one such case where an exaggerated claim has been made for a very minor and trivial injury, if one may describe so, suffered by a person in a motor accident. The injury certificate produced shows that the claimant sustained abrasions minor in nature, tenderness also very minor nature over the body. Age of the claimant was 77 years. This provoked the claimant promptly to move the claim petition claiming Rs. 40,000-00 as compensation. As exaggerated figure has been claimed when compared to the injury sustained by hi...
Tag this Judgment!Deva Prasad Reddy Vs. Kamini Reddy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-03-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3745; ILR2000KAR3663; 2000(6)KarLJ95
ORDER1. The petitioner who is the accused in CC No. 15057 of 1997 on the file of the 6th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore for an offence under Section 494 is seeking quashing of the complaint by resorting to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The respondent-complainant alleged that the petitioner, was found on 16th of May, 1992 to have had an extra marital relationship with one Smt. Nageena and had taken the said Nageena as an wife during the subsistence of her marriage with the petitioner and thus, the accused-petitioner is guilty of the offence under Section 494 of the IPC.2. The petitioner has sought to challenge the taking of cognizance of the offence under Section 494 of the IPC on the ground that in O.S. No. 130 of 1995 filed by the complainant, the legitimacy of the marriage between the complainant and the petitioner is in question, besides the petitioner's application for amendment in MC No. 232 of 1996 on the fileof the Family Court, Bangalore. Thus, the very founda...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›