Karnataka Court October 2010 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.
Mr.Hanumantha Naika S/O Rama Naika Vs. the State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
1. The petitioner is the husband of first informant. Their marriage was performed on 23.03.2008. After the marriage, the first informant was living with the first petitioner in his house at Agrahara Dasanahalli. They have a child. The petitioner used to come in a drunken stage and assault the first informant and he was also demanding money from her to spend for drinking.2. On 19.09.2010 the father and mother of first informant had come to see the deceased. The first petitioner alter seeing his in-laws got enraged and assaulted the first informant and attempted to press the neck of first informant by his right foot. The parents of the first informant rescued the first informant. The investigation is complete and charge sheet is filed.3. Considering the relationship between the parties, nature of offence and allegations lodged against petitioner and punishment provided thereon, detention of petitioner during trial would be a measure of4. In the result, I pass the following:ORDERPetition ...
Ajit @ Ajay Mallu Patil Son of Mallu Paul. Vs. the State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
ORDER1. This petition is preferred by the accused challe aging the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Belgaum, in S.C.No. 1tof 1 /2001. The accused was charged for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 302,114,504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated 28.7.2004 convicted the accused by modifying the offence from 302 IPC to 304 II and convicted the appellant, for the offence under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month and also convicted for the offence under Section 304 II and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 10.000/-.2. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused had developed grudge against PW-1 who is complainant and on the particular date and time, the appellant took PW-1 and assaulted him. On being questioned by ...
Mr Dennis Albert Lobo S/O Thomas a Lobo Vs. Mr Thukarama S/O Lt Chenna ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
ORDER1. This petition under Section 115 is directed against the order dated 17.2.2009 passed in R.R.P.No. 20/2008 on the file of the III Addl. District Judge, Mangalore, setting aside the order of eviction passed in HRC No.69/2005 dated 26.6.2008 en the file of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn), Mangalore.2. The petition is posted for hearing. 3 Heard both sides.4. Contractual facts which need reference are;The petitioner M/s. Dennis Albert Lobo initiated eviction proceedings against the respondents invoking the provision under Section 27 2(a) and (r) of the KarnatakaRent Act, 1999, on the basis that he is a tenant under him in respect of the residential premises described in the schedule to the petition on monthly rent of Rs.10/-. Inthis regard, he averred that originally the schedule property was owned by one V.J.B. Pinto Prabu, who had let out the schedule premises to the father of the respondent Chennappa on monthly rent of Rs.10/-.5. During the life time, V.J.b. Pinto Praohu had executed a ...
State by Sidlaghatta Police Station. Vs. B.N. Nagesh. S/O. Narayanaswa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
1. This appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment dated 21.11.2006 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kolar in Spl.C.C.No.89/03 in acquitting the respondents of the offences punishable U/Ss. 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 427 r/w Sec.149 of IPC and U/s.3(l}(x) of SC and ST (POA} Act- 1989.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 8.3.2003 at about 11.30 p.m. at Boodaguru village, all the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with lethal weapons like iron rods, sickle etc., and with common intention to assault and abuse CW1 - Chowdappa and cause damage to the properties of CW2 - Narayanaswamy and thereby it is alleged that they have committed an offence punishable U/s. 143 of IPC. It is further charged against the accused that at the same date, time and place, all the accused persons being the members of unlawful assembly and with common object; committed the offence of rioting by using criminal force and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s. ...
Krishne Gowda @ Krishna S/O. Late A.S. Ramaiah Vs. the Divisional Mana ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Heard. The appeal is admitted and with the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal3. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.4. Brief facts of the case are:That on 9-2-06, when the claimant was walking on the left side of Mission road, in front of Surya Bakery, Noble Store, an auto rickshaw bearing registration No.KA-04-A-1872 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. As a result, he fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition before the MACT. Bangalore, seeking compensation of .3.00.000/-. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award has awarded compensation of 1,36.400/- with interest at 6% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal the claimant is^ in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.5. As th...
Praveen Kumar. @ Praveen Kumar Nagar, S/O. Prathapehand Vs. Mohammed H ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
JUUDGMENT1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 9"' March 2005, passed in M.V.C.No.404/2002, by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and Member, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chitradurga, (for short, Tribunal' ) for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of 71,43,100/- awarded in his favour as against his claim for 709.50 lakhs, is inadequate.2. The appellant claims to be aged about 23 years, working as Manager/Assistant in Pawn broker and Jewellery shop at Chitradurga, earning a sum of 75,000/- per month. He was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That at about 7:00 A.M., on 05- 11-2001. the appellant met with an accident while he was travelling from Davangere to Chitradurga, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Marurhi Car Bearing No.KA-l6/M-1209 near Iddaga Maidan. at Bharamasagara. Due to the impact, he sustained grievous injuries to right leg and other injuries all over t...
Mubarakulla S/O Abdul Basheer Ahmed Vs. the State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No. 1 in Crime No.475/2010 registered for offences punishable under Sections 324, 307 r/w Section 34 of IPC.2. Heard learned Counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the State.3. As per the statement of injured/first informant, on 11.7.2001, at about 8.30 p.m., when first informant was returning towards his house in his auto rickshaw, petitioner and other accused had caused obstruction to the movement of his auto rickshaw. When first informant blew the arm, petitioner and other accused scaulted injured and his father with a knife and caused injuries to them.4. The learned Counsel for petitioner has made available the copy of the charge sheet filed against first informant wherein it is shown that on 14.6.2010, first informant and other accused namely Vasim, Imran Khan and Aziz Khan had committed robbery of a gold chain of one Kavya. On 26.3.2010, first informant was arrested.5. In the instant case, the incident occurred on 11...
Mr. Chandrashekar @ Chandru, S/O of K.Govind Raj, Vs. the State of Kar ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section-482. of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to allow the application filed in the Court below under Section-311 of Code of Criminal Procedure to recall PWs.1 to 4 for the purpose of cross-examination and to provide an opportunity for the petitioners to cross-examine PWs.1 to 4 and also to recall the order dated 20.9.2010 passed in S.C. NO. 198/2009 pending on the file of the Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Mysore.2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well c-is the learned High Court Government Pleader, this matter is heard on merits.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that PWs.1 to 4 are police officials and petitioners may be permitted to cross-examine PWs.1 to 4 in the Court below. He submits that the offences alleged against the petitioners are under sections 399 and 400 of Indian Penal Code, which are punishable with imprisonment for 10 years. He submits that if no opportunity is provided to the ...
Maheshwarappa @ Maheshi S/O Hosurappa and ors Vs. the State of Karnata ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
1. The appellants No. 1 to 6 were arrayed as accused No.1 to 6 in Spl.C.C.No.46/2001 on the file of Special Judge. Davangere. They were tried, convicted and sentenced for offences punishable under Sections 147. 323. 324. 506 I.P.C. and also for offences punishable under Sections 3 (1) (x) and 3 (1) (xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 1989 (for short 'the Act') Therefore, they have filed this appeal.2. I have heard Sri.Y.S.Shivaprasad - learned counsel for appellants-accused and Sri.Vijaykumar Majage - learned Government Pleader for the State.3. In Drief, the case of prosecution is as follows:-The accused No. 1 to 3 and 6 are the children of accused No.4 and 5. They are residents of Bhulasagara village, Channagiri Taluk. They belong to Uppara caste. PW.l - A.K.Rangappa is the husband of PW.2 -Shanthamma. PW.4- Neelappa is the brother,,of PW. 1. PW.6 - Ningappa is also the brother of PW.l. PW.7 -Nagendrappa is related to PW. 1. The father of PW. I had two wives. Through his...
Sri D Nathmal Vs. Sri S E Ramesh S/O. C Krishnaiah
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-27-2010
1. This appeal is by the complainant challenging the order of the City Fast Track (Sessions) Judge. Bangalore City, FFC-II, passed in Crl.A.No. 1303/2006 dated 11.08.2006 in dismissing the complaint 2nd setting aside the order of conviction passed against the accused.2. According to the complainant., the accused was purchasing paper material from the complainant on credit bass and towards the purchase, issued eight cheques totaling Rs.l,8S,233/-, On presentation of the cheques., it was dishonored with a shara 'exceed arrangement' on 16.10,2001. After causing legal notice, since the accused not make payment, complaint came to he filed, The learned Magistrate, after enquiry convicted the accused and ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 1,20,000/-, in default to suffer SI for 12 months. Against which, the accused preferred an appeal in Cr1.Appeal No.1303/2006 before the City Fast Track (Sessions) Judge. Bangalore City, which came to be allowed by setting aside the order of the Trial Court. Being ...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »