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.
P.Suresh S/O.K.Pitchaimuthu Vs. Smt.S.Deepa W/O. P.Suresh
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDER1. Notice to respondent is dispensed with since the order to be passed in this writ petition will not affect her.2. Petitioner has sought for a direction to the II Additional Family Court, Bangalore, to decide MC.No.10T6/2006, at an earliest.3. The matter is pending before the Family Court since 2006. According to the petitioner, he is an Engineer by profession and he is required to go outside the country frequently. It is further submitted that the matter is posted for cross-examination of the petitioner before the Court below and he is not being cross-examined though 6 to 7 adjournments have taken place.4. This Court can take judicial fact that the Family Courts in Bangalore ore overburdened with work. They will dispose of the matters based on priority and seniority of the cases. Since, MC.No. 1016/2006 is pending before the Family Court, from 2006, this Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice will be met if the Family Court is directed to dispose of the said matter...
Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Cooperative Society Limited Vs. the Stat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Government Advocate for the respondents.2. The land bearing Sy. No.l34/3Al measuring 1 acre 22 guntas was acquired by the Government under preliminary notification dated 30.05.1983 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for the purpose o the petitioner Society. The final notification was issued and the matter was taken up to the Hon'ble Apex Court challenging the acquisition and it has attained the finality. It is thereafter that the petitioner took the possession of the land in question in the year 1988 and the entries were made in the revenue records on 20.12.1995 in M.R. No.16/95-96. After about 5 years, of the certification of the entry of the name of the petitioner in the record of rights, was challenged before the Assistant Commissioner, who allowed the appeal by setting aside the mutation entry. The matter was challenged in the writ petition, which came to be dismissed and ultimately in the Writ A...
M/s. B.K. Enterprises And Ors Vs. 'The Authorized Officer And Chief Ma ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDER1. This petition is filed impugning the order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Bangalore in Original Application No.298/08. dated 16.10.08 and for other consequential reliefs.2. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent in this matter would submit that in the light of the ratio laid down the by Apex court in the matter of United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tondon And Others - 2010 (8) SCC 110. it is not open for the petitioners herein to impugn the order passed by the DRr in writ proceedings, when alternate remedy is available to them under the Act. 3. In the instant case, the relief sought by the petitioners is to set-aside the order dated 16.10.2008 passed by the DRT, Bangalore in a proceedings pending before it in O.A. No.298/2008 and other consequential reliefs. Admittedly, under the DRT Act there is a provision to appeal against the order of DRT before the DRAT.4. After giving anxious consideration to the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the parties a...
Sri Rakesh Malli Vs. Sri Shiva Kumar and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDERJ.S.Khehar, C.J (Oral)1. Mr.Ravivarma Kumar with Mr.J.Prashanth and Smt.Paliavi Shivaganga, advocates for the complainant/petitioner. Mr.V.S.Hegde, learned AGA for accused/respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Dr.Subramanycshwara Rao, Superintendent of Police, Mangalore, is also present in Court, in person.2. The Superintendent of Police, present in Court, has informed us, that cases against the complainant/petitioner for rowdy behavior, for causing hurt, under the Anns Act as also under the TADA, were instituted against the complainant/ petitioner and have since been disposed of. It is submitted, that the complainant/petitioner is presently the President of INTIIC, Mangalore, and as such, the threat perception to his life, as has been mentioned in the instant petition, may not be fully justified.3. hi response to the submissions made to us by the Superintendent of Police, learned counsel for the complainant/petitioner lias invited our attention to the fact, that hired killers were engaged to k...
Sri AshwIn Kumar Vs. Sri Chandrashekar Hari
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
1. These two appeals have been preferred against the order of dismissal passed by the XIII Addl.CMM, Bangalore in CC 4834 and 4835 / 2004 on 9.7.2008.2. According to the complainant. the accused had issued two cheques - one for Rs.5 lakhs and another for Rs.2,50,000/- drawn on Amanath Co-operative Bank Ltd. Shivajinagar Branch. The complainant and the accused commenced business under a partnership - M/s Events 2000 at b'lsoor Road, Bangalore. Also according to them, misunderstanding alose and the accused informed the complainant to go out of the Firm and also informed the complainant to settle the accounts. In that connection, two cheques had been issued by the accused to the complainant and those cheques were dishonored for insufficient funds, on presentation during June 2004. After dishonour when the complainant informed the accused and demanded the money, the accused requested the complainant to give back the cheques and also assured to make cash payment. But He failed to make payme...
Naganna S/O Mallappa Vs. the State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused in Crime No 142/2010 registered for offences punishable under Section 324, 504 and 506 I.P.C.2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleaded for the State and I have been taken through the investigation records.3. The first informant is the nephew of the petitioner. There was a dispute between the family of the petitioner and family of the first informant in relation to a pathway.4. On 06.10.2010, the petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the complainant with sickle and threatened him with dire consequences to his life. Considering the background of occurrence and relation between the parties, without going to further details, the direction sought for is granted for a limited period to enable the petitioner to seek regular bail.5. In the result, I pass the following:ORDERPetition is accepted. Petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, subject to following conditions:1) If the petitioner is arrested in Crime No. 142...
B. M. Purushotham S/O K.B.Mallikarjunaiah Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
The appellant/accused was cried for an offence punishable under Sections 504, 506 and 306 I.P.C. The charges prepared against the accused are as follows:1. That you. On 19.4.2001, at the compound of JMFC Court, Davangere, intentionally insulted the deceased Kavitha and thereby gave provocation to her intending that such provocation would cause her to commit breach of peace and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 504 IPC and within my cognizance.2. That you, on the above said date and place, committed criminal intimidation by threatening the deceased Kavitha to finish off her, thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC and within my cognizance.3. That, in consequence of your causing insult and life threat to the said Kavitha, she being unable to bear the same, on 21.4.2001, at about 9.30 a.m., in her house situated at 2"cl Main. 14th Cross, Vinobhanagar, Davangere. She poured kerosene on her body and set herself on fire and due to the burn injurie...
S Prashant and Nagasuma C V Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
1. Petitioner No.1 and his counsel are present. Petitioner No.2 and her counsel are present. Petitioner No.2 admits her signature before the Court.2. Learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice on behalf of the respondent. He submits that suitable orders may be passed.3. The Police Inspector, Basavanagudi Mahila Police Station, has registered a case in Crime No.148/2009 against accused Nos.1 to 5 for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code read with 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, on the complaint of petitioner No.2. Now both the complainant and her husband, that is petitioner No.1 have filed joint petition praying to quash Crime No.148/2009 pending on the file of II ACMM, Bangalore.4. This Criminal Petition is allowed in terms of the joint petition consequently Crime No.148/2010 of Basavanagudi Mahila Police Station, pending on the file of II ACMM, Bangalore, is hereby quashed....
Ramachandra Son of Hanamappa and ors Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDER1. A case has been registered by the Kerur Police against the petitioners in Crime NO. 123/2010 for offences punishable under Section 80. 81 OF KP ACT AND 143. 147. 148, 336, 342. 323. 324. 504, 506. 109, 353, 307 R/W 149 OF IPC.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case and in fact they were playing cards but not andar-bahar. Since it was a festival day, the people surrounding the village gathered and they were playing cards not for gambling purpose. As it is stated in the complaint itself about 17 police officials on receiving the credible information that the petitioners were gambling went to the spot and gherowed the said assembly and on enquiry, the police came to know about names and address of each one of them who were about 44 persons and two of the said unlawful assembly escaped and brought about 50-60 people to the spot and they were armed with stones, clubs etc. those persons who were arrested were gran...
Sri. Ramanjaneya @ RamanjanappA. Vs. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 27th June 2005. Passed in M.V.C.No. 6349/2003. by the 14'h Additional Judge. Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Court of Small Causes. Bangalore (SCCH-10). (For short, Tribunal) for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of 2,13,520/-awarded in his favour as against his claim for 20.00 lakhs, is inadequate. 2. The appellant claims to be aged about 35 years and working as supplier of firewood to depots, earning a sum of 5,000/- per month. He was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That at about 9:30 P.M. on 28-10-2003, when the appellant was proceeding on his TVS Moped bearing No.KA-40/Y-4950 on NH-7. Near Avoola Nagenahalli, at that time, the driver of the Tipper Lorry bearing No.KA -04/B-5715, drove the said vehicle at high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed against the above Moped, as a result of which, he sustained injuries over his...
- ‹ Prev
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- Next ›
- Last »