Karnataka Court September 2002 Judgments
Smt. Susheela B. JaIn Vs. Bhawarlal Jain
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant71
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. These two revision petitions are filed by the petitioner directed against the order dated 13-8-2002 passed on LA. Nos. 8 and 9 in O. S. No. 46/98 on the file of the Civil Judge, (Sr. Dn), JMFC, Hospet.2. The respondent herein filed O. S. No. 46 of 1998 against the husband of the petitioner for recovery of certain amount and made an application for attachment of schedule property on the ground that schedule properties are being sold to defeat the fruits of decree that may be obtained by the plaintiff. In the said suit, the respondent plaintiff herein produced certain documents which clearly indicated that the schedule property item No. 1 did not belong to the petitioner herein. Inspite of this material, the trial Court without following the due process of law prescribed under the Code of Civil Procedure, passed an order of attachment dated 26-9-1998, of the schedule property item No. 1 along with another, shown by the respondent-plaintiff herein.3. On coming to kno...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. B.N. Suryanarayana Rao Vs. B.C. Seshadri
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: II(2003)BC226; [2003]114CompCas333(Kar); 2003CriLJ1421
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The revision filed against the order of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, in C. C. No. 16056 of 1997 and the order of the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge in Crl. Appeal No. 133 of 1999. The petitioner has prosecuted a private complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, against the respondent for committing the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The trial court convicted the accused respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000 only, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for four months. The cheque amount involved was Rs. 1,52,500. The trial court did not impose the sentence of fine proportionate to twice that of the cheque amount as envisaged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Being aggrieved, the complainant filed an appeal before the sessions judge.2. The sessions judge holds that i...
Tag this Judgment!Ramagouda Malagouda Patil and ors. Vs. Bhajarang Tukaram Bhojane and o ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant154
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. This civil revision is directed against the order dated 26-9-2001 passed in Execution Petition No. 197/2000 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dvn.) and Assistant Sessions Judge, Athani.2. The Execution petition was filed by the decree-holders against the Judgment-debtors to execute the judgment and decree dated 29-6-1998 passed in O. S. No. 71/ 1992 in respect of 6 acres of land to the western strip in Sy. No. 29 of Bommanal village totally measuring 11 acres 16 guntas along with the half share in the well and 5 mango trees. The said Execution Petition had come up for consideration before the trial Court on 26th September 2001. The trial Court after hearing both parties, after taking into consideration both oral and documentary evidence, the material records available on the file and by following the judgment of this court in R.S.A. No. 71 /1992 dated 29-6-1998 has allowed the Execution petition and directed the petitioners to obey the judgment and decree of thi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Distillers Co. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: [2004]266ITR276(KAR); [2004]266ITR276(Karn)
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act 1961, is directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, dated March 28, 2002, in I T. A. No. 565/Bang of 1999 confirming the order dated July 7, 1999, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Bangalore, and seeking restoration of the order of the assessing authority.2. The matter relates to the assessment year 1996-97. The question involved is whether the amount of 'kist' payable by the assessee to the State Government can be allowed as a deduction even when the said sum has not been paid by the assessee in view of the restriction imposed under Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?3. The matter is directly covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Sri Balaji and Co. : [2000]246ITR750(KAR) . Following the said decision, this appeal is dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka by Special Land Acquisition Officer and ors. Vs. Ma ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2336; 2003(6)KarLJ334
Padmaraj, J.1. Since alt these miscellaneous second appeals involve common questions of law and facts, and also as they arise out of the common Judgments and Awards dated 29.1.2002, they are conveniently dealt with together.2. Learned Advocate Sri A.G. Shivanna takes notice for the respondents-claimants and he is permitted to file power within three weeks from today.3. Heard the learned Government Advocate for the appellant-LAO as well as the learned Advocate for the respondents in all these appeals and carefully perused the entire case papers including the impugned common Judgments and Awards made by the First Appellate Court, with their assistance.4. These Miscellaneous Second Appeals filed by the Special LAO under Section 54(2) of the Land Acquisition Act are directed against the common Judgments and awards made by the First Appellate Court, whereby, it has enhanced the compensation payable for the acquired lands of the respondents-claimants of Rs. 11,500/- per acre, on the basis of...
Tag this Judgment!Vasundhara and ors. Vs. Alisab Nadaf and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ2058
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This appeal throws up a controversy of some consequence which is one of the reasons why it has not been disposed of for the last over 7 years. Briefly stated, one Ramachandra Shirahatti, hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased' sustained fatal injuries on 31.5.1986 at about 10 a.m. near a petrol pump in Saundatti town when he was fatally knocked down by autorickshaw bearing registration No. NWJ 389 which was a temporary number issued by the R.T.O., Kolhapur. The wife and children of the deceased preferred a claim before the M.A.C.T. at Belgaum, and they had effectively directed the claim against the respondent No. 4 who is the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. The genesis of the controversy arises because of the fact that this was a new vehicle and it appears that as normally happens, on the payment of the premium, a cover note was issued and on the basis of this cover note the R.T.O. at Kolhapur had issued the temporary registration. As indicated by us, the accident oc...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Leeladevi Rao Vs. K.U. Hari Rao
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC375; 2003(1)KarLJ379
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. That differences can arise between spouses even at ripe old age making it impossible for them to live together is amply demonstrated by the facts of this case. The presence of grown up children who are now settled in life or the economic affluence which the parties have seen in their happier days together has also made little difference in resolving the stalemate and bringing the couple together. Litigation often brings realism with it. In the present case, even that has failed to subdue the negative sentiments which the parties have towards each other. They have continued to stay apart in two different continents for over a decade. With the husband settled in Canada and the wife spending her days in India, there is little chance for their affection overtaking their aversion. It has on the contrary hardened their attitudes and made any reconciliation difficult. All told, the situation in which the parties are placed is unfortunate and the Court's duty to find a s...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Nalini Sunder Vs. Sri G.V. Sunder
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant86; I(2003)DMC254; ILR2002KAR4734
Tirath S. Thakur, J. 1. This appeal by the wife calls in question the correctness of a Judgment and Decree passed by the Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bangalore in M. C. No. 419/1988 whereby the said Court hasallowed the husband's petition Under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act and dissolved the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce. 2. The parties are Hindus by faith, they were married at Bangalore on 2-5-1985. Out of the wedlock, the couple had begotten a child who is presently living with the appellant. Differences having arisen between the couple, they have been living separately since 1988. M.C. No. 419/1988 was in the above background filed by the husband before the Family Court at Bangalore for dissolution of the marriage on the ground that the appellant wife treated the husband with cruelty. The petition enumerated the alleged acts of omission and commission which according to the husband constituted cruelty and entitled him to the relief prayed for. He int...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ravi Construction Company
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ARBLR208(Kar); ILR2002KAR5326; 2003(2)KarLJ532
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. This appeal arises out of an order dated 8-11-1994 passed by the XIX Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, whereby the objections filed by the appellant to an Arbitral Award have been rejected and the award made a rule of the Court. The facts leading to the making of the arbitral reference and the filing of the present appeal may be briefly stated as under:The respondent is a registered civil contractor. Certain civil works in connection with the Hassan-Mangalore Railway project were allotted to the respondent by the Southern Railways of the Union of India in terms of a contract executed by the parties on 7-5-1975. Upon completion of the work, the contractor in terms of a letter addressed by it, raised certain disputes and demanded a reference to the Arbitrator in terms of the provisions of the contract. Petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act which was registered as O.S. No. 2685 of 1982 was in due course filed by the contractor before the Additional ...
Tag this Judgment!Managing Director, North East Karnataka Road Trans. Corpn. Vs. T. Prab ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC270; 2003ACJ1420
N.K. Patil, J.1. In all these revision petitions, the petitioner is assailing the validity and legality of the impugned order dated 27.9.2001 passed by the Principal District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, No. 1, Bellary.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondents herein filed the claim petitions before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for compensation towards the injuries suffered by them in the accident occurred at Beldota Minas Cross, near Mariyammanahalli on 27.6.1997 at 7 a.m. while they were travelling in a K.S.R.T.C. bus bearing registration No. MEF 7452. The further case of petitioner is that claimants have failed to examine themselves in support of their case and the wound certificates pertaining to the injuries suffered by them were produced by the claimants in the MVC cases. The amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is not justifiable. Assailing the correctness of the common order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner has presen...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »