Karnataka Court November 2007 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.
B.S. Puttaswamy S/O Late Sannaiah and ors. Vs. M.C. Shyamala Kumari W/ ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-05-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR5319; 2008(1)KarLJ327; 2008(1)KCCR1
ORDERA.C. Kabbin, J.1. The accused in C.C. No. 117/2007 on the file of the III Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) and CJM, Mysore, has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr. P.C., praying for an Order to quash the proceedings before the Trial Court.2. The respondent No. 1 (complainant) is the wife of petitioner No. 1. The relation between them has been strained and presumably they are residing separately. For grant of maintenance the respondent No. 1 is stated to have filed C.Mis.198/2002 against petitioner No. 1 in Family Court, Mysore, which is pending adjudication. On 29.08.2005, she filed a complaint alleging that petitioner No. 1 by developing illicit intimacy with petitioner No. 2, committed adultery and when she (the complainant) questioned the petitioner No. 1 about his conduct, the petitioner No. 1 with other petitioners went to the house of the complainant on 17.08.2005, challenged her and threatened to kill her, in case she dared to come again with members of Wom...
Hanumantha Gowda S/o Patel Nanje Gowda Vs. the Deputy Commissioner,
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR5146; 2008(1)KarLJ85; 2008(2)KCCR762; 2008(1)AIRKarR298; AIR2008NOC722; 2008AIHC1265(Kar)(DB)
Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The appellant is the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 32181/2004 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The respondents herein are the respondents in the writ petition.2. The appellant is an authorised dealer of a Fair Price Depot under the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992. On the basis of complaints regarding irregularities in the distribution of foodgrains through the appellants fair price depot, the 2nd respondent conducted a surprise inspection on 20.07.2004. Based on the report of the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent - Deputy Commissioner issued Annexure-B notice dated 27.07.2004 requiring the appellant to show cause why action should not be taken against him in respect of the authorisation given to him under the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992. On 31.7.2004 the 2nd respondent - Tahsildar issued Annexure-C order authorising the 3rd respondent to distrib...
C.R. Shantharaj Vs. C.K. Kumaraswamy and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)KarLJ175; 2008(2)KCCR1175; 2008(1)AIRKarR608; AIR2008NOC631; 2008AIHC1447(Kar)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This civil revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is directed against the order dated 4-8-2007 passed in I.A. No. 10 in O.S. No. 5918 of 1988 pending before the I Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, whereunder the learned Trial Judge had rejected the application filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for dismissal of the suit as not tenable.2. Submission of Smt. B.V. Nagarathna, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the rejection of the application by the Trial Court is not proper; that if the application should have been allowed as sought for, that would have brought the suit to an end and therefore it is a case where this Court should interfere within the scope of the proviso to Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.3. While technically submission made may be correct and may bring it within the scope of proviso to Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an applicat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›