Karnataka Court April 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 M.V. Krishnegowda S/O M.V. Krishna Vs. Smt. Prabha W/O M.V. Krisbn ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2010
ORDERAravind Kumar, J.1. The matter was argued for some time and there after Advocate for petitioner has filed a memo signed by the petitioner which reads as under:MEMOThe petitioner humbly submits that the order of the Family Court directing the petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,200/- p.m. is excessive one and his condition is very bad. Any how he undertakes to pay at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- p.m. from the date of petition. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to modify the order of the Family Court accordingly from the date of petition in the interest of justice.The petitioner who is present before the Court admits the execution of memo and he is identified by his Advocate Sri. Madhava Reddy.2. This Court by order dated 29.03.2010 had requested Smt. H.R. Renuka to appear as Amicus Curiae for the respondent, since respondent had been served and remained unrepresented. Accordingly she has appeared before this Court and has defended the respondent. She contends that O...
D.H. Neelakanta S/O Late Honnappachar and Vs. the State of Karnataka R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2010
ORDERA.S. Bopanna, J.1. The petitioners are assailing the Notification dated 18.1.2010. The grievance of the petitioners is with regard to the reservation made to the Doddamagaravalli-I and II Constituencies of Chikmagalur.2. The contention of the petitioners is that while notifying the reserved vacancy, there is repetition, of the seat, more particularly, it is contended that insofar as Doddamagaravalli-I, in the last election one seat was assigned to Schedule Caste while in the present election two seats have been assigned to Schedule Caste, of which one is for Schedule Caste - Woman. Therefore, in this regard, there is repetition. It is further contended that even in respect of Doddamagaravalli-II, the reservation made in the earlier election is for BCMA Woman while in the present election it has been repeated for BCMA - Woman. It is therefore contended that the rotation has not been properly applied and as such, the said seats would have to be shifted to the other Constituencies so...
Sunitha R. Rao W/O Ramachandra Rao and ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2010
N.K. Patil, J.1. Admit.2. This is a claimants' appeal for enhancement of compensation directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 18th of April 2005 passed in M V C No. 2782/2002 on the file of IV Addl. Judge, Member, MACT, Bangalore, SCCH No. 6, (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short).3. By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,55,346/- with 6% interest per annum as against the claim of the appellants for Rs. 20,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased-Ramachandra Rao, in the road traffic accident.4. In brief, the facts of the case are:Appellant No. 1 is the wife, appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are the children and appellant No. 4 is the father of the deceased. They filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- on account of death of Ramachandra Rao in the road traffic accident that occurred on 25.4.2002 at about 12 a.m. The deceased was riding a scooter on Nandi Durg road. B...
Sri Shivappa S/O Sanna Siddappala Channabasappa and Vs. Sri C. Nandiba ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2010
N. Kumar, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree of the trial Court, which has decreed the suit of the plaintiffs as prayed for.2. For the purpose of convenience the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit.3. The plaintiffs are the owners of three bits of agricultural land, which are clearly set out as item Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of 'A' schedule. However, in the 'B' schedule they have clubbed all these three items and given a boundary covering all these three items and described it as 'B' schedule.4. The case of the plaintiffs is that they are agriculturists by profession and permanent residents of Attigere village in Davanagere Taluk. The 2nd plaintiff is the younger brother of the 1st plaintiff and 3rd plaintiff is the son of the 1st plaintiff. The defendants are also agriculturists and residents of Attigere village in Davanagere Taluk. The 2nd defendant is the wife of 1st defendant. Nandyappa was the propositus of the family of the pl...
Jayanthi W/O Sri N. Narasimhamurthy Vs. the Special Deputy Commissione ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2010
ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. Learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice for respondents 1 to 4. Notice to other respondents is dispensed with.2. Petitioner has sought for to issue writ of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 29.12.06 and 30.4.08 passed by the 4th respondent as per Annexures 'F' and 'G'3. Heard.4. According to the petitioner, she is the owner of the immovable property bearing site No. 29 of Mysore Road, Bangalore, having purchased the same out of the residential layout formed by its erstwhile owner one Anantharamaiah and his sons and that she has constructed a residential building in the said site and has been paying the taxes and the khata also stands in her name and that the respondent-authorities without notice to her, holding that the land in question is a Government land, has passed an order to resume the land to the Government by dispossessing the parties who are in possession.5. The grievance of the petitioner is that she is one of the purcha...
S. Mani S/O Srinivasan and Annapurana W/O Mani S. Vs. New India Assura ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2010
N.K. Patil, J.1. Admit.2. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award dated: 19.10.2004 passed in MVC No. 543/2001 on the file of the Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Court of Small Causes, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore, (for short 'Tribunal'), appellants have presented this appeal seeking just and reasonable compensation for the death of their son Sri Rajkumar @ Govind, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicle accident.3. The brief facts of the case are:Appellants herein claim to be the parents of the deceased Sri Rajkumar @ Govind. That on 5.1.2001, at about 1.40 p.m. when the deceased was proceeding on a cycle, a lorry bearing No. MEG 7102 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came and dashed against the the deceased. On account of the same, the deceased fell down, sustained injuries and succumbed to the same on the way to the hospital.4. On account of the death of the deceased, the appellants filed the claim petition before the Tribu...
K. Manjula W/O Late T.P. Prasanna Kumar, Vs. Ismail Khan S/O Muradi Kh ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2010
N.K. Patil, J.1. Admit.2. This is a claimants Appeal for enhancement of compensation against the impugned judgment and award dated 21st of July 2006 passed in MVC No. 769/2000 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) & Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tumkur, (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short) on the ground that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and it needs to be enhanced.3. By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,61,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation as against the claim made by the appellants for a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased-late T A Prasannakumar in the road traffic accident.4. In brief, the facts of the case are:Appellant No. 1 is the wife of the deceased, appellant No. 2 is the minor child and appellant Nos. 3 and 4 are parents of the deceased. They have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, ...
Sri B.C. Shobhakumar S/O Sri B.N. Chandrashekarappa Vs. Smt. Yashodham ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2010
Subhash B. Adi, J.1. This appeal is by the defendant No. 1 against the judgment and decree in R.A.No. 45/1999 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.). Arsikere, confirming the judgment and decree in C.S.No. 268/1994 on the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.). Arsikere.2. Respondent No. 1 is the plaintiff. Suit is one for bare injunction restraining the defendant from bringing the suit schedule property for auction in execution of decree in O.S.No. 113/1990 in Execution Case No. 166/1992.3. Case of the plaintiff is that she entered into an agreement of sale with defendant No. 2 and the father of defendant Nos. 4 and 5 viz., Eshwarappa on 7.1.1988. Under the agreement she had paid Rs. 10,000/- as advance amount. Subsequently on 31.8.1991. the said Eshwarappa executed the registered sale deed and since then she has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. However, defendant No. 1 is seeking to execute the decree by selling the suit schedule property and sought fo...
Jayanthilal Dave S/O. Umesh Datta Dave Vs. State Assistant Drug Contro ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-07-2010
K.N. Keshavanarayana, J.1. The appellant was charge sheeted alleging violation of para 16 and 20(3) of Drugs (Price Control) Order 1995, which is punishable under Sections 7(1)(a)(ii) and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1995 and for those offences the appellant was tried before the 3rd Additional CJM, Mysore in C.C. No. 264/2003. By judgment dated 25.6.2008, the learned CJM acquitted the appellant - accused of all the charges levelled against him. Aggrieved by the said judgment of acquittal, the State filed appeal before the Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 252/2008 under Section 378(1)(a) Cr.P.C. as amended by Act 25 of 2005. The learned Sessions Judge, in exercise of his appellate power, by the judgment and order dated 1.12.2009, convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment and also to pay fine. Against the said judgment of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, the appellant filed Revision Petition before this Court ...
B.C. Ravindra S/O D. Chikkadevegowda and B.C. Devaraju S/O D. Chikkade ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-07-2010
V. Jagannathan, J.1. The defendants in the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff are in appeal, aggrieved by the suit of the plaintiff for declaration and possession being decreed. The main grievance of the appellants-defendants in this appeal is that, without seeking the relief of cancellation of the gift deeds in question, the trial court could not have decreed the suit.2. The facts which fall within the narrow compass are that, the plaintiff filed the suit for declaration and possession in respect of the suit properties which are described as 2 acres and 20 guntas of land in S. No. 1148. 25 guntas of land in S. No. 1223. and 0.30 guntas of land in S. No. 54, all situated in Belagola Hobli, Srirangapatna Taluk, and it was the plaintiffs case that she became the absolute owner of the suit property by virtue of a registered gift deed executed in her favour by her parents on 27.9.1963. Being an old lady, she allowed her sons to cultivate the lands and later executed a registered will i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »