Karnataka Court January 2010 Judgments

State by Sheshadripuram Police Station Vs. Prasad @ Patchi S/O Sri Bor ...

Court: Karnataka

Huluvdi G. Ramesh, J.1. This appeal by the State assailing the order of acquittal passed by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore in S.C. No. 29/2001 wherein a charge-sheet was filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police for the offence punishable under Section 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 of IPC before the VIII Additional CMM, Bangalore who in turn committed the case to Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed the charges against accused Nos. 1 and 2. During trial the prosecution examined in all 14 witnesses and got marked about 13 documents and also got marked 2 M.Os. Since the accused pleaded not guilty, after recording 313 statement and after hearing the parties, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused holding not guilty of the offence alleged. Hence, this appeal by the State.2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the appellant-State and the learned Counsel for the respondents.3. According to the learned Government Pleader F.Ws. 1, 3, 4 and 5 are the wi...

Thimmarayappa Alias Yadalli Vs. State by Bannerghatta Police

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010(2)KarLJ172

ORDER A.S. Pachhapure, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 requesting for grant of bail having been arrested for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this petition are as under:M. Manjunath, son of the deceased-Muniswamy submitted his complaint to the Bannerghatta Police stating that on 10-5-2009 at about 7.45 p.m. when the deceased was bringing the household articles from the shop, found that on the way cows and cattle were tied, he abused the persons who had tied the cattle and as there was enmity amongst the petitioner and the other accused with the deceased earlier, it is alleged that the petitioner and the other accused formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the deceased. It is stated that accused 1 caused assault on the deceased with iron rod, accused 2, 3 and 4 caused assault with clubs, the petitioner, who is accused...

Anuprasad Vs. the Secretary, Government of Karnataka (Mines Ssi and Te ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010(2)KarLJ167

ORDERA.S. Bopanna, J.1. The petitioner herein is calling in question the letter dated 15-6-2009 and the order dated 26-6-2009, which are impugned at Annexures-A and B to the petition.2. The brief facts are that the petitioner claims that he is one of the aspirants to offer his bid when the quarry of ordinary sand in Block No. 3 of the river bed of the Cauvery river is to be auctioned. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent 3 who had been granted quarrying lease on 1-2-2007 has been permitted extension despite expiry of lease period on 30-11-2008. In this regard, it is the contention of the petitioner that there is no power available to respondents 1 and 2 to extend the lease in view of the Rule 21 of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short, the 'Rules'). Reliance is also placed on the order dated 17-7-2009 passed in W.P. No. 19678 of 2009 to contend that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court has already held that such extension cannot be granted...

Smt. Jayamma W/O Siddegowda Vs. the Assistant Commissioner, Mandya Sub ...

Court: Karnataka

A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.1. Appellant had filed, writ petition questioning an order dated 26.05.2009 (Annexure - G) passed by the 2nd respondent - Deputy Commissioner, whereunder, the appeal filed by the 4th respondent herein, against an order passed by the 1st respondent herein, was allowed. The writ petition having been rejected, this appeal has been filed.2. Two acres of land in Survey No. 245 of Kuduregundi Village in Maddur Taluk of Mandya District was granted to the father of 4th respondent, who was a member of Schedule Caste community. Pursuant to the grant, a saguvali chit was issued, which has a condition of non-alienation for a period of 10 years with effect from 21.05.1955. Appellant's husband, Siddegowda purchased the said land under two sale deeds dated 08.08.1966 and 11.09.1967. 4th respondent filed a petition before the 1st respondent to declare the sale deeds as null and void, in exercise of the jurisdiction under The Karnataka Scheduled Caste and Schedules Tribes (Proh...

Smt. Chandra Vs. the Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010(2)KarLJ170

ORDER S. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. In this case, the petitioner has called in question the validity of the order passed by the respondent at Annexure-D, dated 25-7-2008 whereby the allotment of a site bearing No. 671 of Arkavathi Layout in her favour has been cancelled.2. The respondent issued a notification as per Annexure-A, dated 22-2-2004 informing the general public the allotment of sites of different dimensions at Arkavathi Layout, Bangalore. The petitioner made an application for allotment of a site measuring 6 mts. x 9 mts. under the category reserved for economically weaker sections of the society. She was allotted a site on 24-6-2006 as per the allotment letter at Annexure-C. The petitioner has deposited the entire sital value with the respondent. However, the respondent issued notices dated 5-5-2007 and 27-5-2007 calling upon the petitioner as to why the allotment of the site in question should not be cancelled as she was born subsequent to 10-12-1959. Thereafter, the respondent ha...

Dhananjaya Son of Bommaiah Vs. State of Karnataka, Rep. by Nelamangala ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERA.S. Pachhapure, J.1. These petitions are filed lay the petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. apprehending their arrest for the offence punishable tinder Section 306 of IPC.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of these petitions are as under:As both the petition pertain to the same crime, they are taken together for consideration. Yashodamma the mother of the deceased S. Sunanda submitted her complaint to the police on 7.10.09 at 9.35 p.m., and states that on 7.20.09 m the morning at about 11 a.m., the petitioners who are neighbours of the house of the deceased came to the deceased and abused her in filthy language and asked her to die so that they could live comfortably and when the complainant intervened, she was also abused by the petitioners and thereafter, the deceased being not in a position to bear the vulgar and filthy language used against her, committed suicide on the same day at about 6.30, p.m., by hanging herself in the house. Before death, she left a suicide note...

Tayanna, S/O V. Hampayya, Since Deceased, Represented by His Legal Rep ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERAppeals are allowed in part. In modification of the Judgment and awards dated 03.10.2007 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Raichur in LAC. Nos. 05/2007, 09/2007, 08/2007 and 11/2007, the compensation payable to the claimant-appellants for the acquired lands is enhanced from Rs. 6,36,000/- to Rs. Rs. 13,83,000/- (Rupees thirteen lakhs eighty three thousand only), per acre. However, the findings of the Court below, as regards the rate of interest, solatium and other statutory benefits shall remain undisturbed with costs including the court fee payable upon the enhanced compensation. The claimant-appellants shall pay the requisite court fee on the enhanced compensation within eight weeks from today for which the Appellants are liable to be paid by the respondents.Appellants are also entitled to costs of these proceedings....

Smt. Lalithamma Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010(1)KarLJ669

ORDER B.S. Patil, J.1. Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondents.2. Having regard to the nature of the relief sought which lies in a short compass, the matter is taken up for final disposal with the consent of both the parties.3. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order suspending CL-2 licence possessed by the petitioner, pending enquiry into the illegality and irregularities committed by her.4. The Deputy Commissioner, Mysore District, Mysore-respondent 2 herein has passed the impugned order on 14-12-2009 vide Annexure-D suspending the licence, pending enquiry. The allegations against the petitioner relate to having physical possession of excess liquor unaccounted which appeared to be spurious and adulterated. The said liquor, in the opinion of the Deputy Commissioner was meant for sale illegally and therefore the petitioner was prima facie found to have committed irregularities punishable under the provisions of the Karnataka Excise ...

Smt. Ratnamma Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010(2)KarLJ125

ORDER Ashok B. Hinchigeri, J.1. The petitioner has called into question the second respondent's endorsement, dated 11-9-2009 (Annexure-D). She has also sought a writ of mandamus to the respondents to consider her application for the regularisation of unauthorised occupation.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner claims to have been unauthorisedly cultivating the land measuring 2 acres at Sy. No. 156 of Hulimangala Village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore Rural District for over 20 years. It is not in dispute that the land in question is a Government gomal land. She made an application, dated 3-9-1991 (Annexure-B) for the regularisation of her unauthorised occupation of the said land. The respondent 2 has issued an impugned endorsement intimating that the petitioner's application is rejected, as the land in question comes within a forbidden zone of 18 kilometers from Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike limits.3. Aggrieved by the same, this petition is presented.4...

Smt. Bharathi W/O L. Basappa Vs. (Sic) K. Kanatharaju S/O Kantilingaia ...

Court: Karnataka

K.N. Keshavanarayana, J.1. This appeal filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. by the complainant is directed against the Judgment, and Order dated 1 1.02.2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC. Turuvekere in C.C. No. 107/2007. acquitting the respondent-accused of the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. (for short 'the N.I. Act').2. The appellant filed private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. against the respondent alleging the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act inter-alia contending that about one year prior to the date of the complaint the accused borrowed a sum of Rs. 1.50.000/- from her as hand loan and towards repayment of the said amount, the accused issued a cheque dated 30.11.2006 for a sum of Rs. 1.50.000/- drawn on Karnataka Bank. However when she presented the said cheque for encashment, the same was returned unpaid with banker's endorsement dated 4.12.2006 'funds insufficient'. Immediately the complainant i...