Karnataka Court June 2008 Judgments

Smt. Suliya Vs. the State of Karnataka by Mangalore South Police

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2008KAR3438; 2008(5)KLJ657; 2008(3)KCCR1817; 2008(5)AIRKarR207(DB)

ORDERK. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. State Public Prosecutor takes notice to the respondent.2. The petitioner is the wife of A-4 in SC No. 145/2006 on the file of the II Addl., Sessions Judge, Mangalore, who is charged for committing offence under Section 489B and 489C IPC.3. A-4 was granted bail by the Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No. 883/99. During the pendency of the investigation, the charge sheet is filed and later on the case is committed to the sessions. Counsel for A-4 unnecessarily made an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail when the accused already had the benefit of bail. State Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the accused was not regular in appearing before the court on hearing dates. The trial court rejected the bail application by order dated 29-5-2008 and remanded the accused to judicial custody.4. It is the contention of the petitioner that unless the bail granted earlier is cancelled under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. the court has no j...

Zehra Roopa Menon @ Roopa Kumari D/O Late C.P. Parmeshwara Menon Vs. S ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2008CriLJ4206; 2008(5)KarLJ673; 2008(3)KCCR2094; 2008(5)AIRKarR372

ORDERSubhash B. Adi, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order passed by the Fast Track Court dated 11.5.2006 in Crl.R.P. No. 89/05 reversing the order passed by the learned magistrate dated 14.2.2005 in C.C. No. 27/04.2. The Metagalli police charge sheeted the accused for an offence punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Foreigners' Act and also Section 420 of IPC. The case of the prosecution is that as per the provisions of Foreigner' Act, foreigner is under the obligation to maintain certain documents and produce it before such person as prescribed.3. It is found that from 12.1.1994 the accused has been residing in India without, necessary permission. On 16.6.1998, the accused was directed to produce the necessary documents. When the authority got the information that the accused has falsely got created Indian passport with an intention to de-fraud the authority, the authority on coming to know of the same it made enquiries and found that the accused has obtained I...

Mirza Yusuf Baig Vs. State by Chitguppa Police

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2008(5)KarLJ649

ORDERR.B. Naik, J.1. The petitioner/accused 2 is convicted for an offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and is sentenced to simple imprisonment for a period of two months and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days. He is further convicted for an offence punishable under Section 468 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and pay a fine of Rs. 250/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently by judgment dated 26-3-2002 passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Humnabad in C.C. No. 759 of 1998. The said order of conviction and sentence is confirmed by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court II, Bidar by judgment dated 4-10-2005 in Cri. A. No. 21 of 2002.2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner/accused was working as a Block Development Officer i...

Sri Dajiba, Vs. the State of Karnataka Rep. by Its Secretary to Govern ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. Petitioners, questioning the correctness of the impugned order dated 13th December 2006 bearing No. KLR/OCP/SR/1619+1620+1623 on the file of the Land Tribunal, Khanapur, have presented the instant writ petition. Further, petitioners have sought for a direction, directing the second respondent - Land Tribunal, Khanapur to register the occupancy rights in favour of the petitioners in respect of land bearing Sy. No. 86 measuring 05 acres 03 guntas out of 10 acres 05 guntas situate at Topinakatti village, Khanapur Taluk, Belgaum District.2. It is not in dispute that, earlier, the father of these petitioners, Sri. Maruti Jayappa Gurava had filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P. No. 19383/1980 assailing the correctness of the order dated 18th May 1979 passed by Land Tribunal, Khanapur. The said writ petition had come up for consideration before this Court on 18th November 1983 and this Court, after hearing both sides, allowed the said writ petition and quashed ...

Satyan Shantigram and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka by S.H.O. and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2008KAR3513; 2008(3KCCR2087; 2008(5)AIRKarR113; 2008(4)Crimes258

ORDERHuluvadi Ramesh, J.1. Petitioners have sought for quashing of the proceedings pending before the IAddl. CMM, Bangalore in CC 426/2003 regarding taking cognizance of offence and issuing process for the offence under Section 498A, IPC is concerned.2. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Government Pleader. Counsel representing the other respondent is not present.3. Brief facts are: The 2nd petitioner is a native of Bangalore. One Dwarakanath is the husband of the 2nd petitioner. He was working as an Assistant Manager in Indian Bank, Jayanagar Branch, Bangalore. The 1st petitioner is the son of the 2nd petitioner. After his graduation in Engineering, he went to USA i.e., to the State of Oklahama. The daughter of the 2nd accused / petitioner- Usha Dwarakanath also worked in the US A in connection with her employment. The husband of the 3rd accused is the 4th accused who is employed in WIPRO Company. The 1st accused / petitioner is married to one Ranjitha daughter of one S Pra...

Shidarayappa and ors. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2008KAR3495; 2008(6)KarLJ165; 2008(4)KCCRSN322

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. Petitioners, assailing the correctness of the impugned judgment passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore dated 17th June 2005 passed in Appeal Nos. 1161 and 1201, 1202 and 1203 of 2004 and the order passed by first respondent-Assistant Commissioner, Jamkhandi Sub Division, Jamkhandi, dated 13th January 2000 bearing No. BHU.Su.KLR/7A/CR/99-2000 vide Annexures A and B respectively, have presented the instant writ petition. Further, petitioners have sought for a direction, directing the first respondent to grant the occupancy rights in respect of land bearing No. 246 measuring 04 acres 16 guntas situate at Kulhalli Village, Jamkhandi Taluk, Jamkhandi Bagalkot District, in the interest of justice and equity.2. The grievance of petitioners in the instant writ petition is that, they have filed Form No. 7-A for registration of occupancy rights in. respect of land in question and the said matter had come up for consideration before the first respondent on 13t...

Neelakanth Punnappa Halabhavi Vs. State of Karnataka Represented by It ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2008(6)KarLJ111; 2008(3)KCCRSN222; 2008(5)AIRKarR205

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. Petitioner, questioning the impugned order date 1st January 1993 bearing No. KLR. SR. Girigaon: 3 on the file of the Land Tribunal, Chikodi vide Annexure A in respect of land bearing No. 41/4 measuring 02 acres 02 guntas situate at Girigaon village, Chikodi Taluk, has presented the instant writ petition.2. One Smt. Laxmi Bai Girigouda Patil has filed Form No. 7 for registration of occupancy rights in respect of Sy. No. 41/4 measuring 02 acres 02 guntas situate at Girigaon village, Chikodi Taluk. The Land Tribunal, by its order dated 22nd January 1982, has rejected to grant the occupancy rights in favour of the applicant, Smt. Laxmibai. Being aggrieved by the said order, she assailed the said order before this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 20437/1982 and the said writ petition filed by her was allowed and the order passed by Land Tribunal was set aside by this Court by its order dated 18th January 1984 in respect of the land in question with a direction to the ...

Shivalingappa and anr. Vs. the Land Tribunal and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2008(5)KarLJ101; 2008(5)KCCRSN219

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioners being aggrieved by the orders dated 16-9-1981, 6-10-1997 and 14-11-2002 in the proceedings bearing No. Dhamni/SR/186 on the file of the Land Tribunal, Belgaum, vide Annexures-F, E and A respectively, so far it relates to Sy. No. 205/4 measuring 0.12 guntas situated at Dhamne Village, Belgaum Taluk and District, further for a direction to the Land Tribunal to allow the application dated 10-10-2002 filed by the petitioners for impleading themselves in the proceedings, which is pending adjudication before the first respondent, have presented the instant writ petition.2. The only grievance made out by the learned Counsel for the petitioners Sri V.R. Prasanna, is that, when the matter is pending before the first respondent the petitioners have filed an application on 10-10-2002 for impleading themselves as parties to the proceedings contending that, they are the absolute owners of Sy. No. 205/4 of Dhamne Village measuring 0.12 guntas and they are necess...

R. Narasimha Murthy and anr. Vs. M.N. Nagaraju and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(1)KarLJ430; 2008(4)KCCR2407(DB)

1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and the respondents. The matter is disposed of on merits by consent of both the Counsels at the stage of admission.2. So far as occurrence of the accident on 1-2-2003 at about 4.45 p.m. involving the son of the appellants namely Goutham who was proceeding on the scooter of his father on Magadi Main Road, is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the driver of the oil tanker had dashed against the said scooter causing the fatal accident, thereby the appellants lost their only son who was aged about 4 years. So far as the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the oil tanker, though the Tribunal has referred to the judgment in the case of Kumari Sneha v. National Insurance Company Limited, Krishnagiri, Tamil Nadu and Anr. 2000(6) Kar. L.J. 40 : ILR 2000 Kar. 2792, the law laid down in the said case may not be strictly applicable, as it was a case where the child was a pedestrian crossing the road and held that the child in a wa...

M.V. Amar Shetty Vs. the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2008KAR3441; [2009]309ITR93(KAR); [2009]309ITR93(Karn); [2009]177TAXMAN186(Kar); 2008(4)KCCRSN320; 2008(6)AIRKarR161(DB)

B.V. Nagarathna, J.1. This Writ Appeal is directed against the Order dated: 23-11-2007, by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the Writ Petition, filed by the Appellant herein.2. The appellant who was the petitioner in the Writ Petition is an assessee under the Income Tax Act. Being aggrieved by an order dated: 21-8-2007 at Annexure 'A' passed by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, (Respondent No. 1) rejecting his request under Section 220(2A) of the Income Tax Act, which enables an assessee to seek reduction of waiver of the interest payable on the delayed payment of tax demanded pursuant a notice issued under Section 156 of the Act, and for defaulting in payment of tax beyond the permitted period, had filed the Writ Petition.3. In respect of assessment years 92-93, 94-95 and 95-96 the assessee had not filed his return in time and the Income Tax Authorities had issued notice under Section 148 of the Act, calling upon the assessee to file returns for those years who subsequently fil...