Karnataka Court December 2011 Judgments

State of Karnataka, by Circle Inspector of Police Vs. Hosakeri Ningapp ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Mohan Shantanagoudar, J 1. The Division Bench has referred the following questions for consideration by Larger Bench:- (1) Whether the proceedings are vitiated if the case and counter case are not tried as held by the Honorable Supreme Court in Nathi Lal vs. State of U.P. reported in 1990 SCC (Cri) 638 and Sudhir and others vs. State of M.P. reported in 2001 SCC (Cri) 387? (2) Whether the evidence recorded in one case can be looked into the other case? If so, when and to what extent? (3) If the Trial Court disposes of case and counter case on different dates acquitting the accused therein and no appeal is preferred in one of the cases and appeal is preferred in the case decided later whether the proceedings in the later case are vitiated? 2. Brief facts leading to this reference are as under: The case and counter case i.e., Sessions Case No. 1/1995 and Sessions Case No.11/1995, arose out of the same incident that occurred at 2.00 P.M. on 31.3.1994 in front of Neelamma Temple, situated ...

B. Vijaya Kumar Vs. M.B. Mallikarjuna and Others

Court: Karnataka

S.N. SATYANARAYANA, J: 1. Claimant in MVC no.55/2007 on the file of MACT, Davanagere, has come up in this appeal impugning the Judgment date 13/08/2010 passed therein dismissing his Claim Petition. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are as under: Appellant herein, claimant before the Tribunal contends that on 11/09/2006at about 1.15 p.m., while he was travelling from Chitradurga in Kashi Vishwanatha Bus bearing No. KA- 17/A- 2871, the driver of the bus on the way near Bhavihal Village requested the claimant to check the left wheel of the bus. Accordingly the claimant got down to check the wheel. At that time, the driver, respondent No.3 before the Tribunal drove the bus in a negligent manner resulting in the tyre of the bus running over claimant and he sustaining injuries all over the body. It is his case that immediately he was shifted to Bapuji Hospital, Davanagere, where he was treated as inpatient from 11/09-/2006 and subsequently he was shifted to C.G. Hospital, Davanagrere, wh...

Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board. Vs. Ms.Vijaya Bank, and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Vikramajit Sen, Ag.C.J. 1. This writ petition assails the order of the Debt Recover}' Appellate Tribunal, passed on 17.04.2007 directing the petitioner, Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board to pay a sum of 49.59 lakhs co the respondent bank viz., Vijaya Bank. Out of this sum 48.45 lakhs had already been deposited with Vijaya Bank which it was permitted to appropriate. Accordingly the petitioner is required to pay the shortfall of 1.14 lakh to Vijaya Bank. 2. At trie outset we must record our dissatisfaction with the documents placed on record by the petitioner. In particular, Annexure-B purports to be a true copy of the order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal in O.A. No.655/1995, in respect of which the impugned order came to be passed.   One of the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no adverse findings have been returned against the petitioner by the DPT. A perusal of that order however reveals that the Tribunal, has gone into specific detail vis-a-v...

Metal Impacts Pvt. Ltd., Represented by Its Representative Senior Sale ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012(2)KCCR853; 2012(3)CTC(IP)15

(Prayer: This plaint filed under order VII Rule 1 and 2 of CPC r/w Section 22 of Designs Act 2000 before the Additional City Civil Judge, Mayohall Unit, Bangalore, registered as Original Suit No.15349 of 2006 and transferred to the High Court of Karnataka.)1. These two suits are filed by the common plaintiff against the common defendant for an injunction restraining the defendant from infringing the registered designs of the plaintiff. Except two different designs which are the subject matter of the suit in all other respects the facthe ts of the case are identical. Therefore, by consent of parties common trial is conducted and these two suits are disposed of by this common judgment2. The plaintiff file O.S.No.15349/2006 against the defendant on the file of the City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant, their men, from infringing the registered design of the plaintiff bearing design No.187526 dated 10.12.2001 and for other conseque...

Durha Constructions Private Limited, New Delhi, Rep. by Its Authorized ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012(2)KarLJ154; 2012(2)KantLJ154; ILR2012KAR1242

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 04.08.2011 passed in I.A. No.2/2011 in O.S.No.27279/2009 by the City Civil Court, Mayohall, Bangalore, vide Annexure-A.)1. IA No.2 filed by the defendant-petitioner herein under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) seeking to refer the parties for arbitration, having been dismissed vide order dated 04.08.2011 passed by the learned XXVI Addl. City Civil Judge, Mayohall, Bangalore, the present writ petition is filed.2. Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.27279/2009. Plaintiff-respondent herein has filed the said suit seeking a Judgment and decree against the defendant-petitioner herein to pay a sum of Rs.10,88,10,521.96 along with interest at 15% with effect from 21.12.2008. The suit is based on a contract entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant as per the letter of intent dated 18.12.2006 whereunde...

Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board, Rep. by Its Superintendent Eng ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to call for the records in URA No.26/05 on the file of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai; quash the order dated 17.4.2007, passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (Ann-A) and consequently allow the said appeal filed by the petitioner.)Vikramajit Sen, AG.C.J.1. This writ petition assails the order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, passed on 17.04.2007 directing the petitioner, Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board to pay a sum of `49.59 lakhs to the respondent bank viz., Vijaya Bank. Out of this sum of `48.45 lakhs had already been deposited with Vijaya Bank which it was permitted to appropriate. Accordingly the petitioner is required to pay the shortfall of `1.14 lakh to Vijaya Bank.2. At the outset we must record our dissatisfaction with the documents placed on record by the petitioner. In particular, Annexure-B purports to be a true copy of the order ...

Classic Developers, Bangalore, Rep. by Its Managing Partner Sushil Man ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012(2)KarLJ73; 2012(2)KantLJ73; ILR2012KAR1572

(Prayer: This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to declare that the demand on and the claim from the petitioners by the R3 to pay the arrears of Nandi Re-Rolling Mills Private Limited vide Anx-F is illegal and void abinitio; and to supply electricity to the apartment complex on property bearing No.45/1B and 46/2 of Geddalahalli village K.R. Puram, Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk.)1. The first petitioner is said to be a registered partnership firm of which the 2nd petitioner is one of the partners. Four partners of the 1st petitioner jointly made an offer of Rs.2,02,00,000/- Rupees Two Crores and Two Lakhs only) in response to a public notice of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Bangalore, for short DRT, published in the Deccan Herald newspaper dt. 22/2/2004, Annex.A, inviting bids for sale by public auction of the following vacant lands:(1) 1 acre 32 guntas forming part of Sy.No.45/1A and 45/1B, re-numbered as 45/1B;(2) 1 acre 35 guntas including kara...

High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore, Represented by Its Registrar Gener ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012(2)KarLJ55; 2012(2)KantLJ55; 2012CriLJ312

(This suo-motu Criminal Contempt Petition is filed under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India praying to initiate criminal contempt action against the accused herein and punish him in accordance with law.)ShylendraKumar, J.This criminal contempt petition is registered suo-motu by the registry of this Court on receiving a communication dated 17.2.2011 originating from the office of Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Chickballapur and through proper channel addressed to the Registrar General of the High Court and the learned Senior Civil Judge and CJM., Chickballapur having made a request for initiating contempt proceedings against the accused-an advocate practicing before that Court, for the reason that certain uttering by the advocate in the open court hall on the 10th of February 2011, are according to the learned Judge who has passed the orders in RA No.31/2011 pending before that court and which uttering was out of passion which re...

Shama Taj, Ramanagara District.. Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and Distr ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012(3)KarLJ84; 2012(3)KantLJ84; 2012CriLJ364

(Prayer: The WPHC under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the advocate for the petitioner prays that the Honble High Court be pleased to call for the records, issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, declaration or any other suitable writ, order or direction declaring the detention of the detenue made under the order of detention under the Act passed by the Respondent No.1-The Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Ramanagara District bearing No.RAJIKA/MAG/CR/115/11-12 dated 12.10.2011 as per Annexure-A hereto as illegal, null and void and consequently quash the same and issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents 1 and 7 to set the detenue at liberty forthwith and etc.)1. Writ petition by the wife of a person who as of new is detained in central Prison at Parappana Agrahara, Bangalore, in terms of an order of detention dated 12.10.2011 passed by the District Magistrate and Deputy Commissioner of Ramanagara D...

Shama Taj, Ramanagara District Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and Distric ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: The WPHC under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the advocate for the petitioner prays that the Hon’ble High Court be pleased to call for the records, issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, declaration or any other suitable writ, order or direction declaring the detention of the detenue made under the order of detention under the Act passed by the Respondent No.1-The Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Ramanagara District bearing No.RAJIKA/MAG/CR/115/11-12 dated 12.10.2011 as per Annexure-A hereto as illegal, null and void and consequently quash the same and issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents 1 and 7 to set the detenue at liberty forthwith and etc.) 1. Writ petition by the wife of a person who as of new is detained in central Prison at Parappana Agrahara, Bangalore, in terms of an order of detention dated 12.10.2011 passed by the District Magistrate and Deputy Commissioner of Rama...