Karnataka Court January 2003 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.
Smt. Annapurna Vs. State Through Cbi and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2665; 2003(3)KarLJ29
1. This appeal has been numbered with office objections. P.W. 53, the wife of the deceased has sought to file this appeal. The CBI filed the charge-sheet against Al to All. After committal the case was tried by the Principal Sessions Judge, Gulbarga in Sessions Case No. 2 of 1996 for evidence under Sections 120B, 147, 148, 302, 201 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The Trial Court acquitted A2 to A4 and A6 to All under Section 149 read with Section 302 of Penal Code and other offences and convicted A2 to A4 and A6 to All under Section 120B read with Section 201 of the IPC.2. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Trial Court, P.W. 53, the wife of the deceased has sought to file this appeal. This appeal is not maintainable and the proper person to file an appeal, if any, would be the CBI, who filed the charge-sheet.3. Mr. Ravi B. Naik, learned Counsel for the accused relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Jagbir and Anr. v State of Punjab, : 1998CriLJ4588 the Supreme Court has held as...
Vijayakumar Mane Vs. Regional Transport Officer and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant178; II(2004)BC311; 2004(2)KarLJ78
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The writ petition feeling aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge dated 14th December 1999 in W. P. No. 44341/99 has preferred this writ appeal. In the writ petition, the petitioner assailed validity of demand notice dated 9-12-1997 produced as Annexure-F, calling upon the writ petitioner to pay arrears of the tax payable under the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1951, (for short, 'theTaxation Act') for the period from 16-3-1996 to 23-3-1998. The learned single Judge by the order impugned in the appeal has dismissed the writ petition.2. The background facts leading to the filing of the writ petition be noted briefly as under :--The petitioner is the registered owner ofMotor Vehicle bearing registration No. KA-25/5656. The said vehicle was hypothecated to the Karnataka State Financial Corporation, (for short, 'KSFC'), the third respondent herein. Since, the petitioner committed default in paying the amount due to the KSFC, the vehicle was seized by KSF...
S.G. Narayana Swamy Vs. Ramakrishnappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2205
ORDER 8 RULE 1 -- Defendant fails to file written statement within the period of 90 days. Does he lose right to file the written statement even when a valid reason for condonation of delay of application filed?No, he does not lose the right to file written statement.He can give valid reason to condone the delay in filing thewritten statement. The Court in such a situation in theexercise of inherent powers can condone the lapse andadmit the written statement. If any inconvenience is causedto the other side, it could be compensated by awardingrealistic costs which are in nature both punitive andcompensate in order to discourage the misuse or abuse ofthe provisions.(D) Object of fixing limit of 90 days for filing written statement.The object is only to inject the required speed and expeditiousness in trial and disposal of the suits. The Court should lean in favour of an interpretation which sub-serves the purpose and object of the rule and shun the interpretation which is rigid and counte...
Taradevi and anr. Vs. Sakku Bai and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-20-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KarLJ281
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. In this revision filed under Section 115 of the CPC the petitioners landlords have questioned the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Chikmagalur in Revision Petition No. 10 of 1997 allowing the revision petition filed by the respondents-tenants against the orders of eviction passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) in H.R.C. No. 66 of 1987. The Court below reversed the orders of eviction passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) and thereby dismissed the eviction petition filed by the petitioners-landlords. 2. The facts leading to this revision, briefly stated, are as follows: The petitioners filed an eviction petition under Section 21(1)(h) and (i) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 ('the repealed Act', for short), against late B.R. Kashinath who was the tenant under them in respect of the petition premises. The tenant, B.R. Kashinath died on 30-12-1987 during the pendency of the evic...
V.K. Thimmaiah and ors. Vs. Smt. V.K. Parvathi and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-20-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant245; 2003(4)KarLJ376
1. This appeal is by defendants I. 2 and 4 challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Court of the Civil Judge (senior Division) at Virajpet in O. S. 22/1995.2. The parties in this appeal are referred to as they are arrayed in the trial Court.3. The plaintiff who is respondent-1 in this appeal has filed a suit for partition and separate possession of 1/10th share of the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds and also sought for an enquiry under Order 20, Rule 12 CPC to ascertain the mesne profits. Plaintiff is the 2nd daughter of late Sri Kunnaiah. Defendants 1, 2, 3 and 4 are the sons and defendants 5, 6, 7 and 8 are the daughters of late Kunnaiah. Defendant 9 is the son of the first daughter of late Sri Kunnaiah. From the plaint averments it is seen that Kunnaiah died on 9-1-1993. According to the plaintiff the suit schedule properties are the self acquired properties of her father late Sri Kunnaiah and therefore, she is entitled for 1/10th share in the suit schedule pro...
Mahaveer Distributors, Rep. by Managing Partner Vs. Bangalore Electric ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-20-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant205; ILR2003KAR2210; 2003(4)KarLJ430
ORDERKumar, J.1. The petitioner is a registered partnership firm and have taken the premises bearing No. 3, MN Krishna Rao Road, Opposite Cauvery Petrol Bunk, Near Lalbagh West Gate, Bangalore - 560004, on lease on 14.8.1998 on a monthly rent of Rs. 21,000/- as per Annexure-B. The petitioner had filed a suit in O.S. No. 4651/2001 for an injunction against the owner of the aforesaid premises, which clearly shows that the relation between the petitioner and the owner of the premises is strained. The Police complaints have also been filed between the parties.2. The petitioner, by a letter dated 30/08/2002 sought for 53 KW.L.T. power supply to the leased premises as per Annexure-F. Thereafter, a formal application was also filed in the prescribed form on 3.9.2002 as per Annexure -G1 and the receipt is at Annexure-G2. The respondent refused the grant of power supply. The first ground given by the respondent for refusal to grant power supply is, as the leased premises already have power supp...
Shivamma Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KarLJ71
ORDERH.L. Dattu, J.1. Sri H.B. Mahesh, learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice for first respondent. He is permitted to file his memo of appearance within six weeks from today.2. Sri R.S. Raju, learned Counsel takes notice for the second respondent.3. Sri V. Lakshminarayana, learned Counsel appears for respondents 3 to 20.4. The matter is listed for preliminary hearing. By consent of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties to the lis, it is taken up for final hearing, since the issues raised in this writ petition lie in a very narrow compass.5. Petitioner is the President of Town Municipal Council, Sira. She is before this Court primarily calling in question the notice issued by the Chief Executive Officer of the Town Municipal Council, Sira, dated 19-12-2002, on the ground that the said notice is illegal and contrary to the provisions of Section 47(2) and (3) of the Kamataka Municipalities Act, 1964 ('the Act', for short).6. To appreciate the contentions canvassed...
M.S. Khalid and anr. Vs. K.R. Rangaswamy and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KarLJ247; AIR2003Kant174
ORDER1. This is a very peculiar revision petition which is directed against the order dated 28-5-2002 passed on a memo which had been numbered as R.A. 21 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Madikeri. By the impugned order, the learned Civil Judge had directed that the appeal shall be registered as execution appeal instead of as R.A. No. 21 of 2001 inasmuch as the appeal arises out of Ex. Case No. 125 of 1995 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Madikeri.2. It is on this controversy as to whether the said appeal should be designated as a regular appeal or as an execution appeal, the present revision petition is preferred.3. I have heard Sri Abdulla, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Gaurishankar, learned Counsel for first respondent.4. The brief facts leading to the above revision petition are that the present revision petitioner is a person who has filed an application under Order 21, Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Proce...
Dr. M.K. Nanjappa and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KarLJ51
1. The appellants being aggrieved by the common order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. Nos, 112 of 1997, 29569 and 29594 of 1996, dated 29-1-1999 have preferred these writ appeals.2. The appellants are all Lecturers in the Institution known as BHS Higher Education Society, respondent 3 (hereinafter referred to as the'Society').3. The appellants claimed that after the introduction of University Grants Commission scale and staffing pattern from 1-1-1986 the method of appointing Principals in private colleges is based purely on seniority-cum-merit basis from the date of entry as Lecturers.4. Before the introduction of the new staffing pattern the teaching staff were categorised as Lecturers, Readers and Professors and subsequently after the UGC pattern came into force they were reclassified as Lecturers, Lecturers (Senior Scale) and Lecturers (Selection Grade) on the basis of length of service.5. It was submitted that if the new pattern is taken into account the seniority will b...
Shivaramu Vs. Gangamma and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KarLJ412
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 17-1-1989 passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority allowing the appeal filed by the first respondent and setting aside the order of the Land Tribunal by which occupancy right was granted in favour of 3rd respondent and consequently rejected Form 7.2. The main ground of attack is that the Appellate Authority disbelieved the evidence of two witnesses - Nanjappa, the Neeraganti and accepting the evidence of Nanjundappa, the neighbouring villager. It is also contended that the evidence of Rangaswamy, the scribe of Exs. B. 1 and B. 2 was erroneously disbelieved and hence the order passed by the Appellate Authority is erroneous and liable to be set aside.3. Heard the learned Counsels for the parties and perused the impugned orders. Even though the Land Tribunal found that the name of first respondent was entered during the relevant period in the pahanis showing that she was cultivating the land in que...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »