Karnataka Court November 2003 Judgments
Malligenahalli Maheshwarappa and ors. Vs. K.N. Ramarao (Deceased) by L ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1433; 2004(2)KarLJ401
1. The appellants in these appeals and respondents 6 to 15 were the petitioners in Writ Petition Nos: 10209, 10213, 10214 and 10217 of 1996. Respondents 1(i) to 1(v), 2(i) to 2(iii) and respondents 4, and 5 were the respondents in the writ petitions. In these appeals, the appellants have called in question the correctness of the order dated 8th March, 2000 made in the writ petitions referred to above. 2. The facts in brief are as follows:The subject-matter of dispute in these appeals pertains to lands measuring 33 acres in Sy. No. 26 and 28 acres and 4 guntas in Sy. No. 39 of Salabalugadi, Surahonne Village, Honnali Taluk, Shimoga District. Undisputedly, the said lands were Patel Umbli lands. On the application filed by the 1st respondent-deceased K.N. Ramarao and the 3rd respondent-N. Venkoba Rao who were the holders of the village office, land measuring 23 acres in Sy. No. 26 was re-granted as provided under the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to a...
Tag this Judgment!Ameer Jan Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC257; ILR2004KAR88; 2004(3)KarLJ149
Mohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. The appellant is convicted accused in Sessions case No. 4/2000, by the Addl. Sessions Court, Chickmagalur, vide judgment dated 7.5.2001 for the offence under Section 302 IPC.2. The brief facts leading to this appeal are as follows: Smt. Shahina (deceased) was married to the accused about 25 years prior to the incident in question. The accused led married life with the deceased Shahina for about 5 to 6 years. However, thereafter i.e., about 20 years back, the accused all of a sudden disappeared leaving deceased alone. The marriage of said Shahina was again performed with one Basha Sab and out of the said wedlock, P.W. 13 Habeeb was born. After some time, the said Basha Sab also disappeared leaving Shahina and P.W. 13 Habeeb. Thus Shahina and Habeeb continued to live at Lakkavalli village. About 5 years prior to the incident in question, the accused who is the first husband of Shahina came back to Lakkavalli village re-married Shahina in the year 1994 in the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Eswarappa Alias Doopada Eswarappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1033; 2004(3)KarLJ67
S.R. Bannurmath, J.1. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment of conviction dated 11th April, 2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimoga, in Session Case No. 114 of 1996 convicting the accused/appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- with default sentence.2, The brief facts as per the prosecution case are as follows.-The accused Eswarappa alias Doopada Eswarappa and the deceased were married 3 years prior to the incident and staying at Kuppagadde Village in Sorab Taluk. According to the prosecution on 18-5-1996 during the night time the accused strangulated his wife-Lalitha in the house and thereafter hanged her dead body with a plastic wire to the roof and as such has been charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC. In this regard the accusation of the prosecution is that the accused was treating the deceased with cruelty to secure gold chain...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka Vs. Shefi Ahamed
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1976
M.F. Saldanha, J. 1. This is one more of the extremely sad wife burning cases where the accused-husband has been acquitted on the ground that the only piece of evidence against him namely Ex. P-13, the dying declaration, cannot be relied upon. The deceased Naheema had been married to the accused for something like 11 years and she was the mother of three children. The prosecution alleges that the accused Shefi Ahamed used to not only treat her with high levels of unkindness but that he was not even providing for the family's necessities and on top of it that he used to come home drunk. On the evening of 19-1-1996 he came home drunk and demanded his food from the wife, who unfortunately told him that she was able to prepare very limited quantity of food which was only sufficient for the children and that it was not possible for her to give it to him. There was a violent quarrel between them and the husband had taken the can of kerosene oil and doused Naheema and set her on fire. She rai...
Tag this Judgment!Fakkirappa Vs. Yallawwa and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1141
S.R. Nayak, J.1. A minor male child who sustained certain grievous injuries in an accident that occurred on 8.5.2000 involving a motor vehicle bearing certificate of registration No. KA 25-2380 owned by the respondent No. 1 and insured by the respondent No. 2, resulting in amputation of the left leg below knee, represented by his father-guardian, has preferred this appeal calling in question the correctness and legality of the judgment and award dated 4.10.2001 passed in M.V.C. No. 1575 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (III) and II Additional District Judge, Dharwad (for short 'the M.A.C.T.'), seeking more compensation.2. The fact that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the motor vehicle involved in the accident by its driver is not in controversy. Therefore, there is no need for this court to review the finding recorded by the M.A.C.T. with regard to actionable negligence attributed to the driver of the offending vehicle.3. Th...
Tag this Judgment!N.S. Srinivasamurthy and ors. Vs. the Registrar of Co-operative Societ ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR4858; 2004(1)KarLJ179; (2004)ILLJ1085Kant
ORDERN.K. Jain, C.J. 1. This Reference has been placed before this full Bench as per the order of the Chief Justice, dated 16.09.2003, and has come up before us today.2. The necessary facts in brief are:The writ petitioners were in the employment of the second respondent, Shimoga District Co-operative Bank (hereinafter called the 'Society') registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short the C.S. Act). They retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation after 24.09.1997. Their terminal benefits were settled and gratuity was paid as per the Karnataka Co-operative Society Rules (for short the C.S. Rules). The Petitioners submitted a representation before the Society for payment of more amount of gratuity as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter called the P.G. Act) as amended by Act 11 of 1998 Act. The same was rejected as per Endorsement dated 28.11.2000 (Annexure 'J'). Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the Writ Petitions to quash the s...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Devamma Vs. A.R. Raghu
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-17-2003
Reported in: III(2004)BC167; [2004]121CompCas322(Kar); 2004CriLJ1357; ILR2004KAR1099; 2004(2)KarLJ244
ORDERM.S. Rajendra Prasad, J.1. This petition by the accused, filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C., is for setting aside the order dated 22-3-2001 in C.C. No. 167 of 2001 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chikkaballapura, wherein the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance against the accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, questioning the legality and propriety of the order impugned.2. The Court has heard the arguments of Sri Balakrishna, learned Counsel on behalf of the petitioner-accused and Sri A. Gopalaiah, learned Counsel on behalf of the complainant, and perused the material on record.3. The learned Counsel for the accused strenuously contended that the material on record clearly shows that the entire amount under the sale deed had been paid as seen from the registered sale deed and the cheque in question had been issued only for the purpose of securing peaceful possession of the property...
Tag this Judgment!GousemohiddIn Vs. State of Karnataka, by Hangal Police, Rep. by State ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1033; ILR2003KAR4841
ORDERKabbin, J. 1. The right of an accused to be enlarged on bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. after the charge sheet is filed, is the matter in issue in this petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.2. In furtherance of a complaint filed in October 2001 against the accused alleging that by inducing the complainant's minor daughter to go with him he kidnapped her, a case was registered against the accused. In that case, 1 1/2 years after the complaint, the accused ( the petitioner) is stated to have surrendered before the police on 22.4.2003. He was remanded to judicial custody and that custody was extended from time to time. Since the police did not file a charge sheet against him within 90 days, i.e., on or before 21.7.03, he became entitled under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. to apply for his release on bail. Such an application was filed on 23.7.03. It is stated by the prosecution that charge sheet was also submitted on the same day i.e. on 23.7.03. The application for...
Tag this Judgment!GousemohiddIn Vs. State by Hangal Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)KarLJ166
ORDER1. The right of an accused to be enlarged on bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr. P.C. after the charge-sheet is filed, is the matter in issue in this petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C.2. In furtherance of a complaint filed in October 2001 against the accused alleging that by inducing the complainant's minor daughter to go with him he kidnapped her, a case was registered against the accused. In that case, 11/2 years after the complaint, the accused (the petitioner) is stated to have surrendered before the police on 22-4-2003. He was remanded to judicial custody and that custody was extended from time to time. Since the police did not file a charge-sheet against him within 90 days, i.e., on or before 21-7-2003, he became entitled under Section 167(2) of the Cr. P.C. to apply for his release on bail. Such an application was filed on 23-7-2003. It is stated by the prosecution that charge-sheet was also submitted on the same day i.e. on 23-7-2003. The application for bai...
Tag this Judgment!Chinnathambi Vs. N. Veerappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)KarLJ406
V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. Appellant is tenant and defendant in the original suit. Respondents are Trustees of Sri Hanuman Temple situated at Town, Bangalore and they are plaintiffs in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the rank of the parties are referred to as 'plaintiffs' and 'tenant'.2. This appeal is preferred by the tenant against the judgment and decree dated 6-3-1999 passed by the Trial Court decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs and directing the tenant to handover vacant possession of the suit schedule property within two months.3. The suit schedule property belongs to the trust and the appellant herein is the tenant of the same. The plaintiffs filed suit in O.S. No. 10963 of 1994 against the tenant on the ground that the premises is required for the bona fide use and occupation of the of the temple. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the Archak is residing far away from the temple and it is difficult for him to perform the poojas in the morning and evening and it is also di...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »