Karnataka Court November 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.
M/S. Alpine Housing Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. the Principal Chi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. Heard Sri Srivatsa, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri N.S.Sanjay Gowda, learned counsel appearing or; behalf of the respondents.2. Though the petitioner has sought for various reliefs in the writ petition, this Court does not deem fit to grant such pavers as of now. After hearing both the learned advocates, this Court is of the opinion that the grievance of the petitioner is that the Court below is not deciding A.A.No.898/09 pending before it at an earlier date. The further grievance of the petitioner is that during the pendency of A.A.No.898/09, an application ft filed by the petitioner herein for continuation of interim order is also not being considered. Consequently, the respondents are taking coercive steps against the petitioner.3. Without going into the merits of the matter, this Court proposes to direct the Court below to decide A.A.No.898/09 on merits and in accordance with law as earlier as possible, but not later than the outer limi...
Sri Shivaramu. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.6 in Crime No, 162/2010 registered for offences punishable under Section 20(a} of N.D.P.S Act by Keragodu police.2. The Investigating Officer, on credible information inspected the backyard of the house of petitioner and saw that petitioner bad grown three ganja plants. The plants were of three feet in height. The Investigating Officer removed plants and seized the same under a mahazer.3. The learned Counsel for petitioner would submit that the growth of ganja plants in the backyard of the house of petitioner may be accidental There m no prima facie material to show that petitioner had grown ganja plants to prepare ganja and sell the same.4. These queries can be answered only after petitioner m subjected to interrogation. Therefore, having regard to the nature of offences and allegations made against petitioner. I am of the opinion that custodial interrogation of petitioner is necessary for proper investigation of the case. In the result,...
N Ramacharidrappa S/O. K. NarayanappA. Vs. the District Health and Fam ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. As there is delay of 1522 days in filing the appeal, I.A.No. 1/08 is filed for condoning the said delay.2. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award DT. 06-07-04. awarded compensation of Rs.25.000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident occurred on 16-4-97. The respondent No.3 i.e. KGID had deposited the compensation amount on 20-03-06. The claimant had withdrawn the same on 9-1-07 with the help of new Counsel, after obtaining no objection Vakalath from the previous Counsel. He applied for the certified copy of the judgment and award on 17-1-08. that is after 4 years from the date of judgment and award, after 2 years from the date of deposit of the award amount by respondent No.3 and after one year from the date of withdrawal of the amount and secured the copies on 13-2-08 and filed this appeal after 10 months from the date ol securing copies of judgment and awar...
State by Cottonpet Police Station Vs.Dayakara S/O Sid Dale Galak and R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the State assailing the order of acquittal of the respondent - accused passed by the III Add! CMM, Bangalore City, in CC No, 19395/2005 tor the offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC, and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.2. According to the prosecution, the accused No.l married PW-2 Uma Maheshwari on 7.2-2003 at Gowrishankar Mahal Kalyana Mantapa and at the time of marriage, A-2 mother of A-l, A-3 and A-4 sisters of A-l. Have demanded and received cash of Rs.75,000/-, gold neck chain, gold ring and clothe to A-1 and further jewels of about 350 grams to the complainant. After the marriage, while the complainant was living with A-l at Bangalore, A-l to A-4 subjected her to physical and mental cruelty coercing her to bring additional dowry of Rs.5 lakhs from her parents. On the complaint filed by PW-2, police filed the charge sheet after investigation. Since the accused pleaded not guilty of the charges framed, the trial Judge held trial. During Tria...
Ganesha S/O.Subramani Vs. State by J.P.Nagar Police Station
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.l in Crime No.560/ 2010 registered for an offence punishable under Section 304(B) r/ w. 34 of IPC by J.P.Nagar police2. Heard learned Counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the State,3. The petitioner is the husband of deceased Usharani. Their marriage was performed about three years prior to 10.7 2010. After marriage, deceased was living in the house of petitioner and they were Irving cordially. The deceased conceived and she was taken to her matrimonial house for delivery and confinement she gave birth to a female child. The petitioner and his parents' demanded the parents' of deceased to perform naming ceremony of the child in a grand manner. When petitioner was asked to take back his wife, he is alleged to have demanded a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh. The petitioner did not take back his wife and child. The petitioner is alleged to have taken a second wife. The petitioner brought back deceased and set up a rented house in By...
Sri Anil Kumar Wadyar and ors Vs. Smt. Chandramma W/O Eshwarappa Gowda ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. The petitioners have preferred this Writ Petition challenging the order passed by the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressed Commission, Bangalore, upholding the order passed by the District Forum which has directed them to pay the amounts mentioned therein.2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, the amount is to be paid by the company and not by the directors. Directors are not liable to satisfy the said claim. The same being purely a question of law, the Court has the jurisdiction and, therefore, the Writ Petition is to be entertained.3. The District Forum as well as the State Forum has held that there is a deficiency of service and has awarded compensation and the order is passed against the company and its directors.4. The question whether the directors are liable to pay the said amount or not. is a matter which they can agitate by way of a revision. This is not a case where this Court should entertain when the petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remed...
Shaik Hassan Sab S/O Shaik Urtuba Sab. Vs. Anthony Nazarath S/ O Vince ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.3. The brief facts of the case:On 16.9.2007, when the claimant and his son Shabbir were going to their house on Avinahalli road, near the Gas Gowdown of Sagar Town, a Bajaj Boxer Motorcycle bearing registration No. KA-15/H-8017 came from behind in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. As a result, the claimant sustained injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition before MACT, Sagar seeking compensation of Rs.9,75,000/-. The Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs. 1,34,160/- with interest a$ 6% P.a.4. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of accident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only point that arises for my consideration in the appeal is:"Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable o...
Sukanya, W/O. Murthy Vs. the Manager, the Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation.2. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition.3. Brief facts of the case are: That on 27.03.2007 when the claimant was crossing the road on 14th main, 9th cross junction from north towards south a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-05JTB-6381 came in a rash and negligent & manner and dashed against her, as a result she sustained injuries. Hence she filed a claim petition before MACT. Bangalore seeking compensation of .4,00.000/- and the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,06,800/- with interest at 6% p.a.4. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of accident, negligence and liability of the Insurer of the offending vehicle the only point that remains for consideration is: Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?5. After hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perusing ...
VajrappA.S S/O Somaiah, Vs. the State by Talaghatpura Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. Petitioner is arrayed as first accused in Crime No.246/10 registered for offences under Sections 306 r/w34 of IPC.2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Government Advocate for the State and gone through the investigation records.3. Petitioner is the husband of deceased Yellamma. Their marriage was performed about 14 years back. They have five children. There were frequent quarrels between the petitioner and his wife. Several panchayats were convened and the petitioner was advised to mend his behavior. Even then, the petitioner continued to harass the deceased. Therefore, deceased drowned in a sump in front of their house.4. The investigation records do not prima facie reveal the nature of harassment. The investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Therefore, considering the nature of offences alleged against petitioner, his detention during the trial, would be a measure of punishment.5. In the result, I pass the following order: Petition is...
Sri Srinivasaiah P.S. S/O Sri Siddappa Vs. Sri Ramaiah, S/O Sri Rangap ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. Based on an agreement of sale dated 4.7.96, said to have been assigned by the 2nd respondent in favour of the petitioner, a suit seeking specific performance of contract has been filed by the petitioner. The suit was instituted on 10.3.03. In the suit, an application was filed by the petitioner to impaled Sri R. Rangegowda in whose favour the 1st defendant is alleged to have executed a confirmation deed dated 2.8.06 and the Bangalore Development Authority, which has allotted the site in favour of the 1st respondent/ 1st defendant, riding the application to be devoid of merit, the Trial Court has passed an order of rejection. Aggrieved, the plaintiff has filed this writ petition.2. Heard Sri K.N. Srinivasa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the writ petition papers.3. Learned counsel contends that, based on the alleged deed of confirmation dated 2.8.06, the proposed defendant Rangegowda attempted to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the suit p...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »