Karnataka Court February 2009 Judgments

H.P. Mudlappa Vs. H. Narayan

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ285

ORDERJawad Rahim, J.1. This petition by the complainant is directed against the order dated 22-8-2008 in C.C. No. 6966 of 2006 on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution.2. Petitioner, party-in-person is present. The respondent is represented by learned Counsel, Sri Bhootaiah.3. Heard.4. The petitioner, through his petition under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 sought to prosecute the respondent for the offence under Sections 378, 379, 405, 406, 415, 417 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The jurisdictional Magistrate after recording sworn statement of the complainant, took cognizance by order dated 3-3-2006 and issued process against the respondent-accused in response to which he appeared.5. The case was adjourned for evidence before charge and continued in that state till 28-9-2007. Thereafter, on 16-11-2007 noticing the absence of the accused as also complainant and non-availment of benefi...

N. Obalaranga S/O H. Nagappa Vs. the United India Insurance Company Li ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(2)KCCR1288; 2009(4)AIRKarR13; AIR2009NOC1959

Anand Byrareddy, J.1. This appeal was heard along with several other appeals on a common issue namely, the quantum of compensation towards the loss of future earning or loss of future earning capacity, on account of the permanent disability occasioned as a result of personal injuries suffered by a victim in a motor accident.As the computation of compensation under this particular head of claim continues to be strongly disputed in most cases it was fell necessary to seek the assistance of several counsel at the Bar. This Court had the valuable assistance of the following Shri S.P. Shankar, Senior Advocate appearing for Shri Shripad V. Shastri for the appellant, herein, Shri R. Rajagopalan, Shri A.N. Krishna Swamy, Shri O. Mahesh, Shri R. Ravishankar, Shri K.K. Vasanth, Smt. Harini Shivanand, Shri R.S.Umesh, Shri K. Suryanarayana Rao, Shri A.Ravishankar, Shri A.M. Venkalesh, Shri R. Jayaprakash, Shri Arun Ponnappa and Shri Shrishaila, representing either the appellant or the respondents ...

K.V. Seshagiri S/O Late K.G. Venkoba Rao Vs. State of Karnataka Rep. b ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ182

K. Ramanna, J.1. Unsuccessful Inamdar of land has come up with this writ appeal, under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, to set aside the order dated 26-7-2004 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No. 22692/1998 and to restore the order of Land Tribunal dated 19-5-1998.2. The brief facts of the case are that husband of third respondent i.e, late Chotusab filed form No. 7 before the Land Tribunal in the year 1976 claiming occupancy rights in respect of land bearing Sy. No. 64 to an extent of 1.32 guntas of Kowdenahalli village on the basis of lease deed i.e. Guttige Kararu is said to have been executed in the year 1957 in favour of one K.G.Venkoba Rao, father of appellant herein, in respect of land in question along with two other lands i.e., Sy. Nos. 65 measuring 5.3 guntas and 125/3 measuring 0.9 guntas of Kowdenahalli village, Bangalore South Taluk. The land Tribunal conducted the enquiry and by order dated 20-4-1979 rejected the claim of Chotusab. ...

Sri M. Rammohan Rao S/O M. Sadashiva Rao, Practising Advocate, Vs. Uni ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This Public Interest Litigation is filed by petitioners 1 to 4 seeking for the following prayer:The petitioners pray that that Hon'ble Court may he pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or such other Writ or Order or Direction to the Respondents to implement condition No. 4.4.(c) of the concession agreement dated 13.03.2004 and give effect to railway timetable published by South Western Railways vide Annexures 'H' and 'H1' table Nos. 19 and 20 by running trains during day time up and down Bangalore Mangalore via Arasikere Hassan and to grant such other relief in the interest of justice.2. It is averred in the writ petition that the petitioners seek a writ of mandamus to consider the request of the petitioners as well as the Citizens' Forum, Puttur, D.K., for providing, as assured and held out by second respondent in their annual budget and the time table of the Trains of South Western Railways, day service of passenger train up and down Mangalore Bangalore, to ov...

Khaji Mohammed Khalid S/O. Shaj Abdul Azaeez Vs. the Chief Secretary, ...

Court: Karnataka

Ram Mohan Reddy, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. 186/94 on the file of the Addl.Civil Judge.Sr.Dvn), Shimoga, aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dtd. 10.09.2001 in so far as it relates to finding on Issue Nos. 2 & 3 leading to the dismissal of the suit has preferred this appeal invoking Order 41 of CPC.2. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit schedule property being agricultural land was purchased jointly along with his other siblings under a Registered Sale Deed dtd. 13.09.1989 for valuable consideration. Having fenced the boundary of the property by use of barbed wire, it is the allegation of the plaintiff that the Department of Survey and Land Records though issued notices to the Forest Department and the plaintiff for a survey on 12.12.1994 to fix the boundary, nevertheless, the defendant-Forest Department dumped mud on the side of the fence and on 8.1.94 removed a portion of the wire fence. Hence, the suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction restraining the defenda...

Smt. Asha Chakko D/O Late M. Narayan Nair Rep. by P.A. Holder Nityanan ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ139

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties.2. The facts are as follows: A portion of land consisting of buildings, stables and garden collectively called 'Beaulieu' measuring 24 acres and 12 gunlas, was owned by one Shri. Lancelot Rickells and was sold by him under a registered Deed of Conveyance, dated 25.08.1900, for a sum of Rs. 60,000/- in favour of the Dewan of Mysore which was said to be a purchase by him on behalf of the Princess Jayalakshmammanni Avaru of Mysore. It is staled that the sale deed, aller registration, was transferred to the princess' estate and lodged in the Palace Treasury for safe custody. The consideration amount was said lo be paid from the first princess' account and the amount was debited from her pension account due to her for the year 1900-1901. The consideration therefore was not paid by the Government of Mysore or by his Highness the Maharaja, personally. Thus, it is urged, the property 'Beaulieu' was the personal property of Princess J...

Shantappa Vs. Irappa Shankarappa and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(6)KarLJ257; 2009(6)KLJ257

B.S. Patil, J.1. This regular second appeal is directed against the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiffs-respondents 1 to 4 herein.2. Appellant was the 1st defendant and 5th respondent was the 2nd defendant. The suit was filed for taking the accounts of the dissolved partnership firm treating the sales of the properties effected by the 1st defendant in favour of the purchasers as not binding on the plaintiffs and for a decree for the amount found due to the plaintiffs.3. It was the case of the plaintiffs that R.S. No. 88/2 of Krishnapur Village in Hubli Taluk was jointly owned by four persons. The plaintiffs 1 and 2 and the defendants 1 to 3 being acquaintances and friends decided to undertake a venture to develop and sell the land bearing R.S. No. 88/2 and an oral agreement in this regard to carry on the business in development and sale of plots was reached amongst them. As per the terms of the agreement, the plaintiffs 1 and...

S. Siddaramegowda Vs. State by Lokayuktha Police

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009CriLJ2158; 2009(2)KarLJ239:2009(3)AIRKarR25

A.S. Pachhapure, J.1. The appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') on a trial held by the Special Judge at Shimoga.2. Sans unnecessary details the prosecution version unfolded during the trial is as under:P.W. 1-Shekarappa, is a retired employee of VISL Factory, Bhadravathi. He obtained voluntary retirement on 30th September, 1992. After his retirement, the Tahsildar, Bhadravathi has granted Site No. 148, measuring 30' x 60' under Ashraya Scheme in Sy. Nos. 11 and 14 in Hunasekatte Village in the name of his wife, vide order dated 18-2-1993.In the year 1994 he constructed a house in the said site and was residing in the said house along with his family. In the year 1995, the electricity connection was given. Thereafter, in the year 1996 he received the notice from the Assistant Engineer in the name of his wife calling ...

Smt. Janet Shankunthala Maben and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka Rep. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR1839

ORDERSubhash B. Adi, J.1. In this Writ Petition, petitioners have questioned the Notification dated 21.5.1998 produced at Annexure-'H' issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and Notification dated 9.10.2006 produced at Annexure - 'K' issued under Section 28(4) of the Act, and for restraining respondents No. 5 and 6 from setting up of ash pond in the petitioners land and further to conduct the study on the impact of dumping ash and for injunction restraining respondents No. 1, 2 to 4 from taking possession.2. Respondent No. 1 - State initiated acquisition proceedings for the benefit of respondent No. 3 through respondents No. 2 and 4. Respondent No. 3 has proposed to establish a Coal Thermal Power Project in State of Karnataka and in this regard the State has sought to acquire lands for the said purpose. In this Writ Petition, the lands sought to be acquired is for formation of ash pond.3. Though initially unde...

Shivaram Alias Bhadravathi Shivaram Vs. the Police Sub-inspector and o ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ264; 2009(4)AIRKarR146; AIR2009NOC2297

ORDERB. Srinivasa Gowda, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash the notice - Annexure-E, dated 14-8-2007 issued by the third respondent.2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the papers including the impugned notice.3. The second respondent filed a complaint as per Annexure-D before the third respondent requesting to direct the petitioner to hand over the child to her custody. The third respondent-Commission by registering the complaint as Complaint No. KSWC/complaint/1457/2006-07 issued notice to the petitioner asking him to appear before the Commission on 30-8-2007 at 11.30 a.m. and it is stated in the notice if he fails to appear on the said date and time, the complaint - Annexure-D made by the second respondent will be considered in accordance with law.4. Sri Venkatesh Dalwai, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the impugned notice - Annexure-E is wholly illegal and without...