Karnataka Court April 2009 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.
K.N. Subbareddy, Advocate Vs. Advocates Association Represented by the ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking several directions from the Court for proper conduct of elections to the Advocates' Association of Bangalore Notice was ordered to the Association. The Association was represented by a counsel. In fact, on coming to know of the said Writ Petition, Advocates in large number were present in Court at the time of hearing of the Writ Petition and made several submissions for proper conduct of the ejections.2. After hearing the learned members of the Bar, this. Court appointed Sri. Nanjunda Reddy, senior Counsel and Sri N.S. Prasad, Advocate, as returning officers., to take appropriate steps to conduct the elections on 22.03.2009. A Committee to monitor the elections and to resolve any dispute which may arise in the conduct of elections, was constituted by appointing Sri. B.V. Acharya, the former Chairman of the Bar Council of Karnataka and farmer Advocate General, as its Chairman. Directions were issued to finalise the voters list, con...
Jocky Suresh S/O Thammaiah Vs. State of Karnataka by Secretary to Loca ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner's vendor, the kathedar of the immovable property bearing No. 1467 measuring 10 x 7.30 mtrs, in Periyapatna town, Periyapatna taluk, Mysore District, having conveyed the property under a sale deed dt 14.4.2007, made an application dt. 24.5.2007 for change of katha, to the Town Panchayat, Periyapatna. Yet again on 7.7.2007 the petitioner made another application to the 3rd respondent-Chief Officer, Town Panchayat for change of katha, in response to which a notice dt. 16.6.2007 Annexure-F was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to furnish particulars of the property, which when not complied with, was followed by a reminder dt. 5.9.2007 Annexure-G, addressing a copy to the petitioner's vendor. In the said notice, it is stated that the 2nd respondent-Deputy Commissioner passed an order on the representation by public directing the 3rd respondent to hold an enquiry into the allegation that the property in question was public property. The petit...
Sri R. Govinda Raja Setty S/O. V. Rajaiah Setty and Sri Suryanarayana ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
1. These writ appeals are filed by the petitioners in W.P. Nos. 6438/2008 and 6439/2008 being aggrieved by the order dated 27.8.2008 wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court has disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioners to approach the concerned Registrar of Co-operative Societies and in turn, directed the Registrar to hold enquiry on serving notices to the affected persons and to dispose of the matter in accordance with law, expeditiously.2. The appellants herein filed W.P. Nos. 6438-39/2008 seeking for a direction to the respondents to allot a site in IV Phase with demarcation of boundaries and number in Vishwabharathi Housing Complex Layout measuring 60' x 40' as per law.3. It is averred in the writ petition that petitioners are the members and shareholders of the first respondent-Society. Their membership is No. 2274 and 2281 respectively. The first respondent is a house building co-operative society under Co-operative Societies Act, 1956 and Society e...
Sri Anthony Swamy S/O Late Prakashappa Vs. Mrs. Renu Mukunda W/O Mukun ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
ORDERC.R. Kumaraswamy, J.1. This is an application filed under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC praying to stay the order dated 16.2.2009 made on I.A. No. 1 filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC by the Respondents 1 to 16 in O.S No. 8209/2005 on the file of the XIII Addl. City Civil Judge at Bangalore (CCH-22).2. In support of the application, the appellant has sworn to an affidavit stating that originally the land bearing Sy. No. 18/3 measuring 8 acres 28 guntas of Kempapura village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North taluk, belongs to one Munivenkatappa, out of which, he has sold 1 acre 10 guntas under the registered sale deed dated 4.11.1955 in favour his father Prakashappa and he was in possession and enjoyment of the same by obtaining revenue entries in his favour during his life time. The said Prakashappa died leaving behind himself and 18th respondent as his legal heirs to succeed over the same. He became absolute owner of the land bearing Sy. No. 18/3 measuring 1 acre 10 guntas and he ...
M/S Kanhaiyalal Dudheria Represented by Its Partner Sri Sanjay Bachhaw ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. Whether the report of the Lokayukta could be the basis for registering the First. Information Report dated 18.2.2009 against the petitioner and to pass an order dated 19.2.2009 seizing the iron ore alleged to have illegally mined in the forest area as well as the tools, vehicles and machinery used for such illegal mining; and whether such FIR and the order of seizure can be quashed by exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, are the questions that arise for our consideration in the present writ petition.2. The petitioner was originally granted a mining lease on 16.6.1980 bearing M.L. No. 1672 for extracting iron ore for a period of twenty years over an extent of 30.76 hectares in Ramdurg, Sandur taluk, Bellary District, which was renewed further for a period of twenty years from 10.10.2007 with effect from 16.6.2000.3. The undisputed factual matrix of the case are that the impugned iron ore mining is located within t...
Chowgle and Company by Its Gpa Holder, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar S/O Sri Hiral ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. Whether the report of the Lokayukta could be the basis for registering the First Information Report dated 3.2.2009 against the petitioner and to pass an order dated 3.2.2009 seizing the iron ore alleged to have illegally mined in the forest area as well as the tools, vehicles and machinery used for such illegal mining; and whether such FIR and the order of seizure can be quashed by exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, are the questions that arise for our consideration in the present writ petition.2. The State Government initially granted mining lease over an area of 459.63 hectares in favour of M/s. Lakshimnarayana Mining Company in respect of iron ore on 23.9.1963 for a period of twenty years under the provisions of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. Vide notification dated 2.5.1968, the State Government grated sanction for transfer of mining lease in fa...
Smt. Ambika Ghorpade W/O Sri Karthikeya Ghorpade Vs. State of Karnatak ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. Whether the report of the Lokayukta could be the basis for registering the First Information Report dated 4.2.2009 against the petitioner and to pass an order dated 4.2.2009 seizing the iron ore alleged to have illegally mined in the forest area as well as the tools, vehicles and machinery used for such illegal mining; and whether such FIR and the order of seizure can be quashed by exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, are the questions that arise for our consideration in the present writ petition.2. The petitioner is a lessee under the mining lease deed bearing M L No. 2354 dated 19.6.2002 for a period of twenty years over an extent of 12.24 acres in Sy No. 57, 65, 66 and 67 of Kammatheruvu village, Sandur taluk, Bellary district, for mining iron ore.3. The undisputed factual matrix of the case are that the impugned iron ore mining is located within the forest area and the same is governed by the provisions of th...
Sri Anand Raju @ Kulla Raja S/O Sam Raj Vs. the State of Karnataka by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
ORDERK. Bhakthavatsala, J.1. These two Criminal Petitions novo been filed by accused Nos.5 and 80 respectively under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking bail in Crime No. 74/2009 of Ashoknagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307 road with Section 149 of IPC.2. The case of the prosecution is that the Complainant is manufacturer of 'Coffin' in Corporation Shop No. 18, Austin Town, Bangalore. The Complainant is a police informer. 7 to 8 persons belonging to Mubarak Ali used to commit crimes, earn money and send the same to Mubarak Ali. Nobody gave a complaint against them. The Complainant has stated that 2 or 3 times he gave information to police about Mubarak All. Therefore, the persons of Mubarak Ali came to the shop of Complainant, made galata and gave threat to his life. On 26.2.2009 at about 12 noon, when the Complainant son was working in the shop, Mubarak, Velu and two other persons armed with iron rod and dagger came and asked Rajakutti, the Co...
K.C. Ravindranath S/O. Chikkamuniyappa Vs. State of Karnataka by the S ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. The petitioner in Crl.P. No. 3986/2006 has come up with this petition challenging the order dated 31-7-2003 passed in C.C. No. 12011/2003 taking cognizance and directing registration of a case against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 468 & 471 of IPC and to quash the entire proceedings initiated against him.2. The appellant in Crl.A. No. 1709/2007 has sought to set aside the judgment dated 22-9-2007 passed by the XXXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore in Crl.A. No. 1238/2006 and confirm the order of conviction and sentence dated 30-6-2006 passed by the XXII ACMM, Bangalore in C.C. No. 34904/2002.3. Since the petitioner in Crl.P. No. 3986/2006 and appellant in Crl.A. No. 1709/2007 are one and the same, so also the respondent and the subject matter involved therein is also connected to each other, they are taken up together.4. The brief facts of the case of the appellant in Crl.A. No. 1709/2007 is that the respondent-1 is a p...
Smt. Narasamma W/O. Late S.V. Narayanaswamy Rao and ors. Vs. B.R. Laks ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
B.S. Patil, J.1. Order passed on I.A. No. 39 and 30 by the trial court permitting the 1st defendant to adduce his evidence by respening the defendants' evidence is challenged by the petitioners in this Writ Petition. Petitioners are defendants 2(a) to 2(f) before the trial court.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record.3. A perusal of the impugned order discloses that the court below has found that 1st defendant did not avail the opportunity to lead evidence though sufficient opportunity was provided. Despite the same, the court below has persuaded itself to provide an opportunity in the ends of justice to the defendants to lead evidence holding that such a recourse will not prejudice the interest of the petitioners herein. The court below hut allowed both the applications imposing coat of Rs. 500/-.4. Learned sender counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that the 2nd defendant having led the evidence and closed his side, the matte...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »