Karnataka Court January 2006 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.
Gnanamma and ors. Vs. Devaki and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Kant147; ILR2006KAR789; 2006(2)KarLJ475
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. The appellants, who were the petitioners before the Trial Court, had sought for Succession Certificate in respect of monies due to the estate of deceased M. Sundaram.2. The Appellants had claimed as the widow and children of the deceased. The respondent also claimed as the widow of the deceased and contested the petition of the appellants. The Trial Court has allowed the petition in favour of appellants 2 to 4 and the respondent by directing that the Succession Certificate be issued in favour of all the said parties. The Trial Court has found that the First Appellant was not the legally wedded wife of the deceased-as she had admitted that she was a Christian prior to her marriage and as there was no material to show that she had converted to Hinduism-she could not be held to be the legally wedded wife of the deceased.3. The Counsel for the appellant Shri Shaker Shetty would submit that the finding of the Trial Court on the validity or otherwise of the marriage of ...
Yallawwa Kuri and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)KarLJ560
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioners, questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 19-7-1988 in Appeal No. L.R.A. No. 366 of 1986 on the file of the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Dharwad District, dismissing the appeal and confirming the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Shirahatti in proceeding No. TNC:SR:28:76-77, dated 7-12-1978, have presented this land reforms revision petition.2. The grievance of the petitioners in this revision petition is that, one Sri Late Gundappa who is none other than husband of the first petitioner and father of the 2nd petitioner, claiming to be the tenant, had filed Form 7 on 12-12-1975 for registering the occupancy rights in his favour. The said Form 7 is available in original records. In Form 7 he has stated that, Sy. No. 22/2 measuring 1 acre 20 guntas, out of which, 6 guntas of phot karab and he has purchased the land measuring 1 acre 26 guntas, under agreement of sale on 20-7-1970; Sy. No. .22/1 measuring 2 acres, out of which, 6 g...
Sanjay K. Shetty Vs. B. Narayana Shetty
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: III(2006)BC545; ILR2006KAR1080; 2006(2)KarLJ257
V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. This Regular First Appeal is by the defendant questioning the correctness of the judgment dated 19-12-1997 and decree, he has prayed to set aside the same by allowing this appeal and dismiss the suit urging various legal contentions.2. In this judgment, for the sake of convenience, the rank of the parties is referred to as has been assigned in the plaint presented before the Trial Court.3. Necessary brief facts are: Plaintiff is the holder in due course of the pro-note dated 19-11-1986 alleged to have been executed by the defendant in favour of a person known as B. Ramanna Hegde. He had in turn endorsed the pro-note in favour of the plaintiff for consideration. Thereafter plaintiff demanded to recover the amount from Ramanna Hegde and also defendant herein. His demand was not acceded. Therefore suit was instituted for decreeing the suit claim with interest as prayed.4. The defendant entered appearance through his Counsel, filed written statement interalia denying ...
Sadashiva Devadiga Vs. Muddu Devadiga
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Kant83; 2006(4)KarLJ151
Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. This second appeal is by the defendanant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by thelearned II Additional civil judge (Sr.Dn.) D.K. Mangalore, in R A No. 122/1992 in allowing the appeal filed by the plaintiff.2. Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to declare that he has preferred his title over C schedule property by adverse possession and also for permanent injunction. C schedule property is a portion of S. No. 28/8 measuring about 10 cents and contains fence, field, bund, trees and is situated at Madya village of Mangalore Taluk. According to the plaintiff he is in lawful possession of the same as a long standing tenant. The disputed property is in between S. No. 28/9 and 28/8 and it appears to be part of 28/8. Plaintiff claims to be in lawful possession and also filed a suit for declaration that he has perfected title by adverse possession on the ground that occupancy rights were granted in his favour as tenant and the defendant is the owner ...
Shivalingappa Appayya Halagi deceased by LR's and Ors. Vs. Indumati Bh ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KarLJ345
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. The appellant challenges the order passed on an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC' for brevity) seeking review of an order recording a compromise dated 25-9-1992 in F.D.P. 10/90.2. The appellant was the plaintiff in O. S. No. 22/85 which was a suit for partition and separate possession, of a share in the joint family properties. Respondent No. 1 was defendant No. 7 in the said suit. She had engaged counsel and filed written statement. A preliminary decree was passed as on 28-2-1990 in favour of the appellant No. 1 herein. The same was challenged in an appeal before this Court in R.F.A. 239/90 which was allowed by a judgment dated 7-9-1990. Thereafter, the appellant had filed F. D. P. 10/90 before the trial Court.3. The respondent No. 1 had entered appearance through counsel. It is the case of respondent No. 1 that without her knowledge, the alleged power of attorney holder has represented her in a c...
D. Pavanesh Vs. the State of Karnataka Represented by Its Chief Secret ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-03-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Kant97; ILR2006KAR861; 2006(2)KarLJ396
ORDERB. Padmaraj, Ag. C.J.1. The petitioner is a practicing advocate in Bangalore. He also claims to be a public spirited person having faith in the rule of law and rendering great social and legal service by espousing causes of public nature. He has filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by way of public interest litigation with the prayer for issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned Notification dated 23-4-2005 bearing No. RD 174 MUNOMU 2005 issued by the 4th Respondent vide Annexure-A and the consequent Circular dated 23-8-2005 bearing No. RD 174 MUNOMU 2005 issued by the 5th respondent as per Annexure-B. The Government of Karnataka has issued a Notification classifying the registration of certain documents as opposed to public policy dated 23-4-2005 which is as per Annexure-A. The Government of Karnataka has also issued a Circular dated 23-8-2005 in pursuance of the earlier notification dated 23-4-2005 which is at Annexure-B. The petition...
Manjanna Vs. R. Shivanna
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-03-2006
Reported in: ILR2006KAR697; 2006(1)KarLJ555
V.G. Sabhahit, J. 1. This appeal by the defendant is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Court of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Holalkere, in R.A. No. 210/2001 (old R.A. No. 13/2000) dated 24.06.2003, reversing the judgment and decree passed by the Court of the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Hosadurga, in O.S. No. 584/1993 dated 22.11.1999 and consequently, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for declaration of title and permanent injunction.The essential facts of the case leading up to this appeal with reference to the rank of the parties before the Trial Court are as follows:-2. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of his title and for permanent injunction against the defendant in respect of the schedule property i.e., a vacant site with basement situate at Bharamaiahnapalya Village, Srirampura bearing Khatha No .627 measuring East to West 12 Yards (36 feet) and North to South 07 Yards (21 feet) bounded as per the description given in the schedule. It is ave...
Radhakrishna Joshi Vs. Syndicate Bank
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-03-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)BC180; [2006]131CompCas54(Kar); ILR2006KAR2365; 2006(1)KarLJ534
Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. This second appeal is by the defendant, Syndicate Bank being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gulbarga in R.A. No. 52 of 1997 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff while reversing the finding of the Principal Munsiff, Gulbarga in O.S. No. 388 of 1995.2. Plaintiff is a corporate body established under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having registered office at Manipal and having its branch at Super Market, Gulbarga. It is the case of the plaintiff that the son of the defendant Vijayakumar had obtained a loan of Rs. 16,000/- under the Self Employment Scheme for doing the business of television servicing situate at H.No. 8-426, Fort Road, Gulbarga. The loan was sanctioned at the rate of 10% interest with monthly installments of Rs. 250/- starting from 28-10-1988 and the last installment was due on 28-1-1994. After obtaining the loan from the Bank, due to ill-health...
Marico Industries Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-03-2006
Reported in: [2006]148STC17(Kar)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.,1.A failed effort on the part of the Revenue to bring to tax coconut oil sold in branded form and in containers as a toilet article, i.e., as hair oil subject to tax under entry No. 10 of Part 'T' of the Second Schedule to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the Act') at the rate of 15 per cent as against the rate of four per cent claimed by the very Petitioner-assesses as an edible oil taxable at four per cent in entry No. 1 of Part 'E' of the Second Schedule to the Act in which effort the Revenue failed in terms of the judgment of this court in the case of State of Karnataka v. Marico Industries Ltd, reported in [2001] 124 STC 196, has given rise to the present legislation by introduction of entry No. 17-A in Part 'C' of the Second Schedule to the Act, with effect from April 1, 2001 by Act 5 of 2001 which is again challenged by the petitioner-dealer on the ground that the Legislature by introduction of this entry subjected coconut oil sold und...
State of Karnataka and ors. Vs. Taj National Educational Society and a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-02-2006
Reported in: 2006(104)ECC23; 2006LC23(Karnataka); 2006(2)KarLJ21
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Appellants are before us being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 7-1-2002 passed in W.P. No. 29053 of 1998 in this appeal.2. Taj National Educational Society ('the Society for short) and Md. Wasig Ahmad Quraishi filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 29053 of 1998 with the following facts:3. First petitioner-Society is a registered educational aided institution. The post of Headmaster in the Society was lying vacant for nearly 3 to 4 years. The Society issued an advertisement in the newspaper calling for applications from the qualified and eligible candidates to fill up the post of Headmaster in the school run by it. Pursuant to the advertisement, Sri Quraishi made an application and his application was favourably considered by the Society. He was thereafter appointed as Headmaster of the Society. The said appointment was subject to the approval of the education department. Thereafter the Society submitted a proposal in the matter of approval o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »