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.
Muniswamappa, Son of Late Erayellappa Vs. Smt. Narasamma and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. Petitioner/plaintiff has filed O.S.No.805/1997 in the Court of Civil Judge (St. Divn.,), Bangalore Rural District, against respondents/defendants for the relief of specific performance of an agreement. The respondents have filed written statement and have contested the suit. Petitioner filed I.A N.o/4 seeking permission of the court to incorporate the proposed amendment in the plaint. Defendants filed statement of objections and opposed the prayer in I.A No.4. The trial court, upon consideration of I.A No.4, finding the application to be devoid of merit, has passed an order of dismissal dated 14.07.2010. Feeling aggrieved, the plaintiff has filed this writ petition.2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that, I.A No.4 has not been considered in the correct perspective and its dismissal, in the facts and circumstances of the case, is irrational and illegal. Learned counsel submits that, for determination of the real question in controversy between the parties ...
Prakash P. Vs. Muniyanniah,
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. The petitioners are the grand sons of Doddannaiah and sons of Pillappa, whereas the 1st respondent is the wife of Dodda Kakappa, the eldest son of the propositus-Doddannaiah. The genealogy is produced at Annexure-"B".2. The family of the petitioners and the 1st respondent was a joint family and owned many properties including lands. Apart from other properties, the land bearing revision Sy. No.100/5 measuring 32 guntas was a service inam land attached to Nirganti service of Bellandur village and it was granted to the husband of the 1st respondent vides Order of the Assistant Commissioner in HOA(S):197/68-69 dated 05.11.1971. The said Dodda Kakappa, the husband of the 1st respondent died on 30.12.1997 and in the circumstances, the name of the 1st respondent was entered into the records of this property under a mutation entry I.H.C. 5/2003-04 produced at Annexure-"A".3. It is the case of the petitioners that there was a partition amongst both the branches including the disputed l...
Sri Kama Ram, S/O. Mohanji. Vs. Sri V.Ramesh, S/O. B.Vadmal, Major
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDERRespondent has obtained a decree for ejectment against the petitioner which was sought to be executed in EP.No.224/2008 in the Court of the IVth Additional I Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Mysore. The petitioner, who is the judgment debtor filed I.A.No. 1 to stay further proceedings on the ground that O.S.No. 1501/2009 filed by him is pending. The said application having been found to be devoid of merit was rejected. These writ petitions are directed against the aforesaid order.2. The petitioner does not dispute the fact, that, he is a tenant in the premises. The petitioner has also not paid the rent/damages amounting to Rs. 1,40,000/-. By an order dated 06.10.2010, the petitioner was directed to deposit in the Trial Court a sum at the rate of Rs.3.000/- p.m. from the date the suit was instituted. The said order has not been complied with.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits the petitioner is not extending any co-operation is not giving instructions.4. The claim made before the Co...
Vijaya Bhupal Desai S/O Late Bhupal Jayawanth Desai Vs. the Government ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. The order vide Annexure-'L' dated 5.3.2009 passed by the State Government canceling the appointment of the petitioner as the Official Receiver is called in question in this writ petition.2. The records reveal that the Court of Prl.Civil Judge, Bangalore City, appointed Sri N.S.Srinivasan, Advocate, as Official Receiver to look after the affairs of the properties involved in O.S.No.53/1975. The said suit is now re numbered as 809/1980. Because of the death of Mr.H.S.Srinivasan, one Mr.H.Puttaswamy who was already appointed as Official Receiver by the State Government was continued as Official Receiver in respect of the matters viz., I C.No.6/93 connected with I.C.7/93 pending on the file of CCH-li and in respect of O.S.No.809/80, pending on the file of CCH-14, till the completion of the proceedings. Such an order continuing Mr.H.Puttaswamy as Official Receiver in respect of I.C.No.6/93 connected with I.C.No.793 and O.S.No.809/80 is produced at Annexure-'M' to the writ petiton. P...
G.A. Suresh Kumar, S/O. G.D.Anantharajaiah. Vs. the Commissioner, Myso ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. The petition is filed challenging the Order to hold enquiry under the provisions of Order 21 Rule 97, 98 and 100 r/w. Section 151 CPC.2. The facts relevant for this purpose of this petition are as under:The petitioner herein is the owner and landlord [hereinafter referred to as "the landlord"] of the property bearing No.162 9 new No.33/3 situated at Makkaji Chowk, Srirampet, Mysore. The 2nd respondent is the tenant [hereinafter referred to as "the tenant"] in possession of the said property since many years. The tenant filed H.R.C No.90/1996 under Section 19 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 seeking permission to deposit the rent. The 1st respondent, the Commissioner of Mysore City Corporation was also a party to the said proceedings. The petition was dismissed with a direction to the tenant in the said petition to pay the rent to the landlord. Aggrieved by the Order, the tenant preferred a revision in R.R. No.85/1998 and the said revision petition came to be dismissed as...
C.A. Srinivas, S/O Late B.N.Appaiah Chetty Vs. the State of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. Learned HCGP is directed to take notice for the Respondents No.1 and 2. Sri H.K.Thimmegowda. Learned counsel is directed to take notice for R3.2. The 3rd respondent had recommended for change of katha in respect of site No.93. APMC Yard. Chikkaballapura in favour of the petitioner. The said recommendation at Annexure D was sent to respondent No.2 for approval. Since the said recommendation has not been considered by respondent No.2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition for a mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider the same.3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties. I am of the view that respondent No.2 has to consider the recommendation at Annexure D at an early date. Therefore, I direct respondent No.2 to consider the recommendation at Annexure D and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.4. Learned Advocates are permitted to file ...
Sudheer Surendra Halagi Vs. S.M.Upadhye and National Insurance Co. Ltd ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
JUDGMENJ1. This appeal by the appellant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 19/05/2005 passed in MVC No. 547/2001 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and CJM, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandya, (hereinafter referred to as ' Tribunal' for short).2. By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has .awarded a sum of 2,09,525/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its deposit as against the claim made by the appellant for a sum of 15,00,000/-, traffic accident.3. In brief, the facts of the case are:The appellant claims to be aged about 40 years at the time of accident, hale and healthy and agriculturist by profession. That at about 11.15 p.m., on 8.4.2001 the appellant was travelling in the motor cycle bearing No.KA.22.L.7040 as a pillion rider and the rider of the motorcycle was driving the same with high speed in a rash and negligent manner and when they came near Belgaum-Kanapura road near Bermno, he lost his control over it an...
M/S Links Private Limited, and ors Vs. Serve and Volley Outdoor, Adver ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDE R 1. The petitioners in the above petition have sought for quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.29636/08 pending on the file of the learned XXIV ACMM. (SCCH-20). Mayo Hal), Bangalore. 2. Facts leading to the case are: First petitioner is a Company established under the Indian Cos. Act, 1956 and represented by its Managing Director, who is the sixth petitioner. Petitioners 2 to 5 are its Directors. 3. Petitioner No.6 as Managing Director of the first petitioner - Co. had issued a cheque bearing No. 691062 dt. 12-12-07 drawn on ABN Amro Bank. Bangalore, for Rs.4,50,000/- in favour of the respondent towards discharge of amounts due to them. On presentation of the cheque, it was returned with an endorsement as "funds insufficient' and petitioners failed to pay the cheque amount, despite notice issued to them. Therefore, respondent filed a complaint and under Sec. 200 of Cr.P.C against the petitioners in PCR No.6217/08. The trial Court registering the complaint and taking cognizance of th...
Smt.Siddamma Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. Petitioner No.1 is the mother of petitioner No.2, petitioner No.2 is the mother of petitioner No.3. The injured namely, Meena is the daughter-in-law of first petitioner. The husband of Meena i.e., the son of first petitioner had left ids house and his whereabouts are not known. The injured was staying in the first floor of the house. The first petitioner was staying in the ground floor of the house. The husband of injured owns about 27 guntas of land. In relation to the house and land, there appears to be some dispute between petitioners and injured. It is alleged that on 29.7.2010 at about 6.00 p.m., there was quarrel between petitioners injured.The petitioners are alleged to have pushed the injured from the first floor of the house as a result petitioner fell down from first floor and suffered injuries on bear C-6 vertebra. Even after complete treatment, she was not in a position to move. These facts are narrated in the statement given by injured. The petitioners having commi...
Sri.C.T.Desai S/O Late Thakore Desai Vs. Emdee Exports and Dr.Bhakthar ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
1. The appellant was the judgment debtor in Ex.No. 153/2003. The 1st respondent was the degree holder and the 2nd respondent was the auction purchaser. Since the claim of the decree holder has been satisfied, the s respondent has no interest in this appeal and the appellant is also not seeking for relief against the 1st respondent, he is only the formal party.2. The appellant and the respondent No.2 have settled their dispute amicably accordingly, they have filed a joint memo, which is signed by the appellant and his Counsel and also signed by the advocate for the 2nd respondent.3. The appellant has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.75.000/- in full and final settlement of the claim of the 2ml respondent within a period of one month, failing which the said amount shall carry interest at 24% p.a. from today till the amount is paid. The said joint memo is taken on record.4. In view of the joint memo, the order passed on I.A.No.8 in Ex.No. 153/2003 dated 06.06.2005 on the file of the 19"' Addl.Ci...
- ‹ Prev
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- Next ›
- Last »