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.
Sri.Roshan D'SouzA. Vs. Smt.Suzan D'SouzA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to set aside the order dated 10.03.2010 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K.. Mangalore in Crl.M.sc.Case No.50/09 cancelling the bail order granted to the petitioner on 24.10.2008 and directing the Investigation Officer to take the petitioner into custody.2. The parties will be referred with reference to the status before the Court below.3. The primary facts of the case is as under:That on 02.08.2008. the petitioner/ complainant had filed a complaint against her husband and his parents for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, further read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. On the basis of the said complaint. Crime No. 176/2008 was registered at Ullal Police Station. Accused No. 1 is the husband, accused No.2 is mother-in-law and accused No.3 is father-in-law of the petitioner/ complain...
Mangalamma, W/O. Late Ningappa and ors. Vs. S. T. Devaraju. S/O. Tirum ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation.2. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to os they are referred to in the claim petition.3. Brief facts of the case are:That on 17.11.2005 when the deceased Ningappa was going to Muttanahalli on his bicycle along with his friends, near Saragur water tank on Poorgali-Belakavadi road a milk canter bearing registration No.KA-1 l-D-8181 came from Belakavadi side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased, as a result, he fell down and died on the spot. His wife, two major sons and mother filed a claim petition before MACT, Malavalli seeking compensation of .12,60,000/- and the Tribunal has awarded compensation of .3,05,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.4. Deceased Ningappa was aged about 40 years at the time of his death in the accident as evident from post mortem report Ex P 4 and Inquest report Ex. P 3. The age of the wife of the deceased is shown as 38 years in the claim petition. In her c...
Smt. S. N. Hemalatha D/O Late N Nanjundaswamy and ors. Vs. the Commiss ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 14.02.1990, by which he was dismissed from service and it was also ordered to recover the sum of 1,41,541.60 being the loss caused, as arrears of land revenue. The inquiry report and the order of the Revisional Authority, which have gone against the petitioner, have also been assailed in the petition.2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition papers.3. Alleging certain irregularities against the deceased petitioner in causing shortage of petrol and diesel belonging to the first respondent-Corporation, an inquiry was ordered on 03.10.1989. The Inquiry Officer after completion of the inquiry submitted his report dated 03.02.1990 holding the deceased petitioner to be guilty of the charge. The Inquiry Officer however recommended that appropriate punishment would be to withhold certain increments. The Disciplinary Authority was however of the view that a different punishment is to be imposed and...
Shabbir Khan and Ameena Bi W/O. Mustafa Khan Vs. B.M.Diwakar S/O. B.T. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER:1. These Misc. Cvls., are filed by the learned counsel for the appellants for condemnation of delay of 43b days in filing the appeal and also for production of additional documents to substantiate the prayer sought by them.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and 'earned counsel for first respondent.3. Learned counsel for the first respondent has submitted that, he has no objection to allow these applications.4. The delay in filing the appeal has been explained in the affidavit filed along with the application, sufficient cause has been shown and the same is accepted.5. In the light of the submission made by learned counsel for first respondent and for the reasons stated in the affidavits filed along with the applications, delay in filing the appeal is condoned and appellants are permitted to produce additional documents to substantiate their prayer. Accordingly, this Misc. Cvls. are disposed of....
S P Rajagopal S/O Late Papaiah a. vs. Thimmarayappa. and Ammayyamma W/ ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal by the plaintiff is directed against an interlocutory order dated 22.4.2010 passed by the Court of the XXTV Additional City Civil Judge. Bangalore City, (C.C.H.No.6) in the suit in O.S.No.791/2010. By the impugned order, the trial court has rejected the application-J.A.No. 1 filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of CPC for grant of an order of temporary injunction to restrain the respondents/defendants from putting up construction over the schedule property. Further, it has partly allowed I.A.No.3 filed by the respondents by vacating the interim order dated 5.2.2010 and permitting the respondents/defendants to proceed with the construction on the disputed property with a direction that they shall not claim equity in the event of their losing the suit.2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the impugned order. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant, in support of the appeal relied on a judgment of this Court in ...
Sri.K.Suresh S/O K.Krishna Shasty Vs. Aryan High School Association an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Kukkaie Ramakrishna Bhat. Learned Counsel appearing for 1 respondent and the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 22. In view of the submissions put forward, this petition is disposed of finally.3. The petitioner's grievance is that though h?, was appointed against the vacancy that fell following the death of one K.S,Ramakrishna, the appointment of the petitioner was termed temporary subject to approval of the Department. It is the case of the petitioner that, ever since his appointment, he lias been functioning as the Assistant Master and though the 1 respondent has approved the appointment of other teachers against the vacancies which fell subsequently, the petitioner has not been made permanent for want of approval by the Department.4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner referred in this connection Annexure-B which is the order of appointment dated 13.10.1997 and sought for the petitioner being permanen...
Sri ChikkamaddappA. S/O Late MunigangappA. Vs. the State of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. In this writ petition, petitioner is challenging the endorsement dated 26.04.2010 issued by the Tahsildar, Chikballapur - respondent No.4 herein rejecting his request to enter his name in the khatha pertaining to the lands bearing Sy.No.20 measuring 2 acres and Sy.No.22 measuring 38 guntas of Chikkakaniganahalii, Nandi Hobli, Chikballapur Taluk and District.2. Petitioner has sought for entering his name in the khatha in respect of the aforementioned lands alleging that the said land has been granted in his favour and a saguvali chit dated 08.12.1989 came to be issued by the Tahsildar. He enclosed a copy of the saguvali chit issued by the Tahsildar on 08.12.1989 in Form No.1 in respect of his claim that the land in question was granted in his favour. The Tahsildar has rejected the request observing that there was no record in his office regarding the grant of land in favour of the petitioner. He has further stated that even after searching the records of the year 1988-89. No rec...
The Kaniataka JaIn Association and Mothikhane Thimmappaiah Vs. Sri Nav ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. Order dated 12.03.2009 passed by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge. Bangalore, allowing I.A.No.XI filed by the plaintiffs seeking amendment of the plaint is challenged in this Writ petition. By the amendment ordered, the Court below has permitted t lie plaintiffs to add paragraph-22(a) to the plaint and also to make certain amendments to the prayer column.2. The main contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that by amending the plaint the plaintiff is virtually seeking a prayer for appointment of a new trustee in respect of the 2nd petitioner-Trust which was net made a party and in respect whereof no relief was sought while filing the petition seeking leave to file the suit. It Is his contention that the application itself was not maintainable as the plaintiffs have to proceed against the 21"1 petitioner-Trust by filing a fresh petition seeking leave and only after 'eave is granted the proceedings against the 2nd. peiitiouer-trust can be pursued. It is his fur...
Syed Wasim S/O Syed Nazeer Vs. the State of Karnataka,
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. Petitioner is in judicial custody in Crime No. 142/2009 registered for offences punishable under Sections 186. 353. 332, 307 read with 34 IPC.2. I have heard learned counsel for the accused and learned Government Advocate.3. The petitioner attacked police personnel with deadly weapons when the investigation officer tried to apprehend him in Crime No.547/09.4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been granted bail in Crime No.547/09 by the learned Sessions Judge. Therefore, petitioner is entitled for bail in this case also.5. The learned Government Advocate opposed the bail application contending that petitioner is involved in several cases. This submission was controverter by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, learned Government Advocate was directed to produce necessary documents which are made available today.6. On perusal of the records it is clear that the petitioner is involved in heinous offences. The learned counsel for t...
Rashmi Vijayan Vs. the Managing Director, Bmtc and Ksrtc
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Heard.3. 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 2-12-05. When the claimant was carefully boarding the BMTC bus bearing registration No. KA-0I-F-1375 at Ejipura bus stop, the driver of the bus suddenly moved the bus. As a result, claimant fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, she filed a claim petition before the MACT, Bangalore, seeking compensation of Rs.7,50,000/-. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award has awarded compensation of Rs.2.53,000/- with interest at 7% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal the claimant is in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.5. 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 my consideration in ...