Karnataka Court February 2001 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.
Subbaiah Vs. State by Anekal Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ3163; 2001(4)KarLJ358
ORDER1. This petition is filed against the order of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anekal C.C. No. 435 of 1999. The petitioners are the accused and alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code on 8-9-1994. It is unfortunate to note that the charge-sheet filed smacks of ignorance of the rudiments of the criminal law on the part of investigating agency, in particular the P.S.I, of Anekal working as on 30-7-1999 who filed the charge-sheet. The offence under Sections 341, 323 of the I.P.C. are mentioned without invoking the aid of the provisions regarding sharing of common intention under Section 34, common knowledge under Section 35, abatement under Section 107, sharing of common object envisaged for the offences under Chapter VIII of the I.P.C. or for conspiracy under Section 120(B) by the accused jointly. Unless the said provisions are invoked joint trial of the accused would not be permitted in law and it is necessary that spec...
State Through Shahabad Town Police, Gulabarga District Vs. Shivaji and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: II(2001)DMC28; ILR2001KAR1460; 2001(4)KarLJ500
Kumar Rajaratnam, J. 1. This is an appeal against acquittal preferred by the State.2. The State being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal recorded by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Gulbarga, passed in S.C. No. 32 of 1992, dated 7-2-1995 in acquitting the accused respondents for offences under Sections 498A and 307 of the IPC, has preferred this appeal against acquittal.3. This is a case of the husband pouring kerosene on his wife and setting fire to his wife, aided and abetted by the mother of the accused A-2.4. The prosecution case enforce in the evidence of P.W. 7-wife. She stated that A-1 was her husband and A-2 was her mother-in-law. Her father was no more. Her marriage to A-1 took place on 8-5-1990. P.W. 7, the wife was living with the accused after the marriage. About 5 months after the marriage, A-1 demanded the P.W. 7 should bring Rs. 2,000/-from her mother for opening a pan beeda shop. The said money was given to A-1.5. For two months after the money was given, the life w...
Deepa Finance Corporation Vs. A.K. Mohammed
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD(Cri)731; [2002]108CompCas636(Kar); 2001CriLJ3582; ILR2001KAR4310
K.R. Prasada Rao, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant against the order of acquittal of the respondent/accused in respect of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (for short the ' Act') by the impugned judgment dated 9.7.1997 in CC. 17411/89 on the file of the Court of Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC (Jr. Dn.), Mangalore.2 Appellant filed a private complaint in the Trial Court alleging that the respondent borrowed loan amount of Rs. 20,000/- on 14.10.1986, Rs. 10,000/- on 22.10.1986, Rs. 10,000/- on 4.11.1986, Rs. 10,000/- on 20.11.1986, Rs. 10,000/- on 6.1.1987, Rs. 7,000/-on 3.2.1987, Rs. 8,500/- on 10.9.1987 from their firm by executing 'on demand pronotes', undertaking to repay the said loan amount jointly and severally. As the respondent did not pay the entire principal amount, the appellant made a demand for repayment of the loan amount and in that connection on 10.4.1989, respondent has issued 8 post-dated cheques for different amounts of Rs...
Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Aslam Ali Baig and ors ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: I(2002)ACC705; I(2002)ACC705; 2002ACJ705
T.N. Vallinayagam, J.1. The above appeal is preferred by the insurance company against the award in M.V.C. No. 732 of 1990 on the file of M.A.C.T., Mandya, raising a question about the liability on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle concerned in the accident was not having valid driving licence to drive heavy passenger vehicle.2. Answering the question against the appellant, the Tribunal held that the driver had valid driving licence for driving heavy passenger vehicle. Rejecting the contention that there was violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy in question, the Tribunal held that the driver having heavy vehicle licence has to undergo more test than a driver to get ordinary driving licence of light vehicle. The Tribunal has found that no authority was cited in support of the contention and held that the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation.3. Questioning the above finding, the learned Counsel for the appellant relied upon the Div...
S. Ramesh Vs. Basanth Kumar Patil
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2001
Reported in: ILR2001KAR2833; 2001(6)KarLJ201
ORDER1. The petitioner is common in all these petitions. He has questioned the cognizance taken for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the proceedings initiated by the learned XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.2. The petitioner herein issued 7 cheques for Rs. 5 lakhs each dated 19-8-1998 in favour of the respondent. When the cheques were presented for encashment through Bank of India they were bounced with an endorsement 'Account closed' dated 22-8-1998. Therefore, the respondent caused a legal notice as required under Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act and thereafter filed complaints before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore through the power of attorney, who recorded the sworn statements of the power of attorney, took cognizancefor the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and issued summons.3. The petitioner appeared before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and secure...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hardware Trading Co.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2001
Reported in: (2001)167CTR(Kar)4; [2001]248ITR673(KAR); [2001]248ITR673(Karn); [2001]116TAXMAN274(Kar)
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The Revenue has through this reference posed the following question for opinion of the High Court :'Whether, on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the provisions of Section 147(b) would not apply to the present case ?'2. The brief facts that may be relevant for the consideration of this question are that the assessee who is the respondent to this reference is trading in paints and other related products. We are concerned with the assessment for the assessment year 1985-86 which was originally completed under Section 143(3) on August 6, 1986. What is of some consequence is the fact that the Income-tax Officer concerned had left a note in the file which is contemporaneous with the assessment and which, it is necessary for us to reproduce because it is of some consequence :'Note not for the assessee : During the accounting period Asian Paints India Ltd., has presented a Matador van to the assessee for the out...
Mangalore Jesuit Education Society Vs. Mrs. Rita D'Souza and Ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Kant317; ILR2001KAR3358
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. The Mangalore Jesuit Education Society, a Society registered, is before this Court, challenging the order in Rent Revision Petition No. 312/87 on the file of District Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, dt. 17-7-96 on the following facts.2. Parties would be referred to as per their ranking viz., landlord and tenant in this order. The landlord Society filed a petition before the Principal Munsiff, Mangalore in HRC No. 411/83 seeking eviction under Section 21(1)(h) of the KRC Act. According to the petition averments the Society is running various educational institutions situated in one compound called College Gardens. Petition premises is situated in the same compound. There are several staff members working in the Institution and they need residential accommodation. The Society is unable to meet their demand and therefore they want this premises. They further contend that greater hardship would be caused to the petitioner if an order is not passed on this petiti...
The Women's National Education Society Vs. the Mangalore theosophical ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2001
Reported in: ILR2004KAR4513
V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this appeal are referred to as per their rank in the Trial Court.2. The plaintiff and defendant are two different societies. This appeal is filed by defendant in O.S.No. 272/83. That suit was filed by plaintiff/respondent for injunction restraining the defendant from amending its Rules and Regulations and to direct it to accept 5 nominees of the plaintiff on the council of management of the defendant. The basis on which the suit was filed was, plaintiff was the owner of property bearing T.S.No. 192 of Kodialbail village in Mangalore City; that it had constructed buildings for running a school and boarding house; that on 15-5-1943 it had transferred the said property to the defendant with a condition that defendant shall run the school by electing 5 of the representatives of the plaintiff annually to its council of management but during the years 1980-81 and 1981-82 the defendant refused to accept 5 nominees of the plaint...
Taxi Owners' and Drivers' Association, Mysore Vs. State of Karnataka a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-2001
Reported in: ILR2001KAR2255; 2002(2)KarLJ263
ORDERTirath Singh Thakur, J.1. Constitutional validity of Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Amendment Act, 2000 has been assailed in these writ petitions insofar as the same has abolished the distinction between motor taxi cabs and motor cabs and brought both types of vehicles under one head for thelevy of motor vehicle tax. The challenge to the amendment proceeds primarily on the ground that motor cabs are vehicles distinctly different from motor taxi cabs, which distinction had been recognised by the Legislature by providing a lesser rate of tax for motor taxi cabs in comparison to motor cabs. Item 4(1) of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 as the same stood before the impugned amendment reads as under.--'4. Motor vehicles other than those mentioned in Items 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 plying for hire and used for transport of passengers.--(1) Vehicles permitted to carry (excluding driver).-- (a) Not more than three passengers 55.00(auto-rickshaw cab)(b) Not more then five passenge...
The Regional Director, Esi Corporation, Bangalore Vs. Deccan Studios, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-2001
Reported in: [2002(95)FLR168]; 2002(3)KarLJ257
Chidananda Ullal, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the ESI Corporation to challenge the order dated 3-3-1997 in ESI Application No. 23 of 1988 filed by the respondent-applicant. 2. The appellant-Corporation is represented by the learned Counsel Smt. Geethadevi, whereas, the contesting respondent is represented by the learned Counsel Sri N. Raghupathy. The respondent 2, the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore, having been served with the notice had remained absent before Court. Therefore, I feel that it is appropriate for me to direct the learned Additional Government Advocate Sri Ashok Mensinakai who is present before Court to take notice for the said respondent and he had since done that before Court. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant Smt. Geethadevi had taken me through the facts of the case and further the impugned order under challenge. She had argued that the respondent-employer did not adduce acceptable evidence before the ESI Court to dislodge the presumption available in favour ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »