Karnataka Court August 2006 Judgments

Sri N. Narasimhiah S/O Late Sri Narasimhiah Vs. Smt. B.S. Vimala D/O S ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2007Kant39

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition No. 10166/2006 is by the 1st defendant in O.S. No. 239/2002 and writ petition No. 10119/2006 is by the sole defendant in O.S.No. 264/2002 on the file of the Court of 1 Addl. Family Court at Bangalore.2. While O.S.No. 239/2002 is instituted by the sole plaintiff in the suit seeking for a relief of permanent injunction against the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and for other consequential relief. O.S.No. 264/2002 is by one Smt. Vimala/plaintiff who is also the plaintiff in O.S.No. 239/2002, along with her son, who is the 2nd plaintiff in O.S.No. 264/2002, impleading the common defendant, who is said to be the husband of the 1st plaintiff and the suit is for the relief of partition of plaint schedule properties and for their share, on the premise that the 1st plaintiff is the wife and the 2nd plaintiff is the son of the defendant.3. The Family Court it appears had taken up...

Ramesh S/O Mallappa Vs. Smt. Mallamma W/O Ramesha and Smt. Latha D/O R ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006CriLJ4811

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This is a most frivolous writ petition abusing the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,2. Petitioner is the husband of the first respondent and father of the second respondent. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 had filed a Miscellaneous Petition under the provisions of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [for short the Code') seeking for maintenance in Crl. Misc. No. 155/2003 before the II Addl. Family Court at Bangalore. The said petition was ordered in terms of the order dated 19-2-2004 (copy at Annexure-C] awarding monthly maintenance of Rs. 1,000/- in favour of each of the respondents during the lifetime of the petitioner and till the second respondent - daughter gets married.3. This order has not been made subject matter of any appeal However, it appears the petitioner had failed a Crl. Miscellaneous No. 191/2004 under Section 126 of the Code which continues to remain pending on the file of the very court.4. It ...

Sri S. Srikanth Joshi, Chief Executive, Aladangady Vyavasa Seva Sahaka ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(5)KarLJ484

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Petitioner is a person, who was working as Chief Executive of Aladangady Vyavasaya Seva Sahahaki Bank, Aladangady, Belathangadi taluk, Dakshina Kannada district. It appears there were complaints of harassment of women workers in the bank by the petitioner and in this context as per the directions of the second respondent - Karnataka State Women's Commission - the Board of Management of the first respondent-bank had constituted a committee for complaints against sexual harassment at work place and one Ms Asha Nayak, an Advocate, headed the committee. It also transpires that a good number of members of the committee were drawn from the staff of the very bank and the very branch also.2. When the committee had been constituted, the petitioner was a little apprehensive of the composition of the committee and in this regard he had approached this Court by filing WP No 20515 of 2005, seeking for a declaration that the directions issued by the second respondent-...

Pundalik S/O Bhimagoudappa Biradar Vs. Sharadabai W/O Pundalikbiradar

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2008(5)KarLJ182; 2008(1)KCCRSN80; 2008(2)AIRKarR114; 2008CriLJNOC548

ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. This revision petition is filed by the petitioner who is none other than the husband of respondent-Sharadabai under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Cr.P.C, to set aside the order dated 17/7/2003 passed by the Fast Track Court, Bijapur in Crl.R.P. No. 114/2001 and to confirm the order dated 11/4/2001 passed by the Civil Judge ( Jr. Dn.) & J. M. F. C., Indi in Crl.M. No. 2/1998.2. Assailing the said order the revision petitioner has come up with this revision petition mainly on the ground that the impugned order under challenge is not only illegal and against the material evidence placed on record but also incorrect in allowing the revision petition filed by the respondent before the Fast Track Court holding that the recovery proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 125(3) of Cr.P.C. fox recovery of arrears of maintenance as ordered by this Court in Cr.R.F.23/93 with effect from 30/5/1989 is maintainable, The Court below has not considered or verified as to ...

The Sangli Bank Ltd. by Its Pa Holder - Mr. M.R.V. Prasad Vs. Smt. Sud ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2007Kant3;

H.V.G. Ramesh, J.1. This second appeal is by the 8th respondent/Bank being aggrieved by the order passed by the District Judge in 28/1998 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial court in Final Decree Proceedings in 25/1987 by order dated 2.9.1998.2. A suit in OS 200/1979 came to be filed before the IT Addl. Civil Judge, Belgaum for partition and separate possession of half share in the building, out house and backyard. As there was a dispute among the family members, the plaintiff - Pandurang/6th respondent herein had filed a suit wherein according to him, the appellant - bank was the occupant as a tenant and the rental amount was being distributed between himself and the 1st defendant In the suit filed by the plaintiff -Panduranga Rao, it appears there is a serious contest by the 3rd defendant and the legal representatives of the 8thdefendant According to the defendants, they had relinquished the right in favour of the 1st defendant - Krishna Rao who is the brother of t...

Kulla Venkata Shetty Vs. the Managing Director, Karnataka State Road T ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2008(119)FLR251]; ILR2008KAR1416; 2008(4)KarLJ363; (2009)IILLJ39Kant; 2008(4)KLJ363; 2008(3)AIRKarR95; 2008LabIC(NOC)797(Kar)(DB)

Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment dated 13-6-2006 in Writ Petition No. 5997 of 2006 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The appellant is the petitioner in the writ Petition.2. The challenge in the writ petition was against an order passed by the Enquiry Officer in a disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner. The learned Single Judge noted that the enquiry proceedings were at the stage of arguments and took the view that it would not be proper to interfere with the enquiry proceedings at that stage and that the petitioner should raise an industrial dispute before the Labour Court after the decision is taken by the employer on culmination of the disciplinary proceedings.3. Having heard the Learned Counsel for the appellant and having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to agree with the view taken by the Learned Single Judge. It is neither proper nor desirable for the High Court to invoke its ...

Commission and General Agency a Regd Partnership Firm, R/by Its Partne ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR3582; 2006(6)KarLJ150

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the court of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) Mangalore in HRC. No. 30/95 dated 24.2.2003 holding that the application filed for restitution under Section 144 CPC, pending in execution would abate in view of the provisions of Section 70(2)(c) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 (for short 'the Act').2. It is the contention of the petitioner that respondent herein filed eviction petition against the petitioner seeking for eviction of the petitioner and possession of the premises under Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 in HRC. No. 30/95. The said petition was decreed exparte. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred RRP.91/95 and the exparte order of eviction passed in HRC. No. 30/95 was set aside by allowing the application filed for setting aside the exparte order. However, in the meanwhile since the respondent had taken...

K.U. Mariambi W/O. Abdul Khader D/O. K.A. Ummer Vs. P.A. Abdul Khader ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2008CriLJ495; ILR2007KAR4276; 2008(6)KarLJ147

ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. This revision petition is filed by the wife of the respondent under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 9.3.2004 passed by the J.M.F.C. Madikeri, in P.C. No. 170/2003 and to direct the said Court to take cognizance of the case.2. Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the petitioner was performed with respondent on 11.12.1988 at Bavali village, Edapala Post, Madikeri Taluk, Kodagu Dist. On account of the alleged harassment, she filed a Private Complaint No. 170/2003 for an offence punishable under Section 498(A) and 506 IPC r/w Section 3, 4 and 5 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The learned Magistrate referred the matter under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for investigation. After investigation 'B' report came to be filed by the Investigating Officer which has been challenged by the revision petitioner before the Magistrate stating that it is a false report. After recording the evidence, the Court below held that the Court cannot come to a conc...

N.P. Krishnamurthy and ors. Vs. N.R. Pandurangappa and anr.

Court: Karnataka

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 7-4-2006 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 54 of 2003 allowing the appeal purporting to be one filed Under Section 27(3) of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (for short, 'the Act').2. Under the impugned order, the Tribunal has, while allowing the appeal which was in turn directed against the order dated 28-12-2002 passed in Case No. SOR. 55/2002-03 by the District Registrar, Chitradurga District who had declined to cancel the registration that had been given in favour of the society known as 'Sree Ranganatha Swamy Temple Committee', has set aside the impugned order holding that the order was bad to the extent it declined to allow the application for holding that the registration of the society was illegal.3. The society it appears had been granted registration in terms of the order dated 21-5-2002 in Registration No. 55 of 2002 at the instance of several persons wh...

Smt. G. Kusuma Devi Vs. Smt. Gowramma and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Mohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. Assailing the correctness of the judgment and decree dated 16-7-2001 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in R.A. No. 7 of 1995 by which the judgment and decree of dismissal of suit dated 14-12-1994 passed by the Principal Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in O.S. No. 12 of 1992 is reversed, the defendant has preferred this second appeal.2. Heard the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of both sides and perused the material on record. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranks before the Trial Court.3. Brief facts of the case are:The plaintiffs-respondents herein filed suit for ejectment against the defendant-appellant herein in respect of A Schedule property and also for mandatory injunction against the defendant to remove the unauthorised construction put up on B Schedule property and for delivery of vacant possession of the suit schedule property.It is...