Karnataka Court February 2011 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.
Pa Hanumanthaiah S/O Anjinappa, and ors. Vs. the Tahsildar Tumkur, and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-01-2011
1. The rejection of petitioner's I.A.Nos. 1 to 3 under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC; Section 5 of the Limitation Act; under Order 22 Rule 9 CPC to bring on record the legal representatives of deceased Narasahanumaiah. the 1st respondent by condoning the delay and setting aside the abatement, by order dated 31.05.2004 of the II Addl. District Judge. Turnkur, in Miscellaneous Petition.60/2000 is called in question in this petition.2. Petitioner instituted Miscellaneous Petition 60/2000 under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC to set aside the order dated 28.08.2000 and restore M.A.(VOA) 38/1993 to file. Notice when issued on 10.10.2000. the petition was listed on 14.12.2000. whence a memo was filed by the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent reporting the death of Narasahanumaiah. S/o. Lenkappa on 26.11.2000. and the proceeding adjourned to 51.01.2001. Petitioner filed I.A.Nos.1 to III on 4.9.2001. 7.1 1.2001 and 29.1 1.2003 to bring on record the legal representatives of deceased Narasahanumaiah by condoning ...
H.P. Satish Kumar and Others Vs. the Deputy Commissioner, Mysore Distr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-01-2011
(These Writ Appeals Filed U/S 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in the writ petition Nos. 7698-7701/2010 (LB-ELE) Dated 11/03/2010) Sabhahit, J. These appeals are filed by the unsuccessful petitioners in W.P.Nos. 7698-7701/2010 being aggrieved by the order dated 11-3-2010 wherein the learned Single Judge has declined to interfere with the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mysore District wherein in the enquiry for disqualification under Section 4(2) of the Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1967 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’). I.A. III filed by the complainants to withdraw the complaint has been rejected and the Deputy Commissioner has ordered issue of summons to the witnesses. 2. The appellants herein filed writ petitions being aggrieved by the order rejecting I.A.III which was filed by the complainants for withdrawal of the complaint wherein they had alleged that writ petitioners were disqualified under...
George Thomas Vs. K P Krishnappa and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-01-2011
(Prayer: This Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 22.11.2010 passed by the 3rd respondent (vide Annexure A) and etc.,) 1. This writ petition was heard extensively, at some length on earlier occasions and today and I have heard Sri K G Raghavan, learned senior advocate, who has appeared for the petitioner and also his colleague Sri Ganapathi Hegde, who has made elaborate further submissions today. 2. In the present writ petition, writ petitioner, who is son of one C I Thomas, claims interest in an agricultural land located in Old Sy No 28 (New No 127) of Byrathi village, Bidarahalli hobli [formerly Hoskote taluk, now Bangalore east taluk, to an extent of 2 acres of land in this particular survey number, and is aggrieved by the order dated 22-11-2011 [copy at Annexure-A to the writ petition], where under the right, title and interest, if any claimed by the writ petitioner as successor to late C I Thomas, has been ext...
M.G. Ashwatha Shastri Vs. Canara Bank, Chamarajpet Branch, Bangalore a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-01-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Court of the XIII Additional City Civil Judge, Mayo Hall, Bangalore (CCH-22) on I.A. No. II in O.S. No. 27417/09. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondents Nos. 3 to 5 and one more person (who was not made a party to the suit proceedings) availed of the financial assistance from the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. As the security for the repayment of the loan, they have also mortgaged the suit schedule property. As the said borrowers committed default in the payment of amounts, the entire loan was recalled. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 initiated the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’ for short). The appellant claiming to be the tenant approached the Civil Court seeking the relief of permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession and the enjoyment of the suit...
S. Krishna and Another Vs. Joint Secretary, Cofeposa, Central Economic ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-01-2011
(This WPHC is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to writ of habeas corpus direction declaring the detention of Shri Firoz Khan @ Feroz Khan S/o. Yusuf Khan, by F.No.673/1/2010-CUS.VIII dated 25.02.2010 as per grounds of detention (Annexure -“A”) as illegal and void ab initio.) K.N. Keshavanarayana, J. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for a declaration that the detention of his friend Shri Firoz Khan @ Feroz Khan S/o. Yusuf Khan, resident of Flat No.802, Rhine Apartments, Sturrock Road, Falnir, Mangalore - 575001, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Detenue’ for short) pursuant to the order of detention No.F.No.673/2010-Cus.VIII dated 25.02.2010 issued by the Joint Secretary of COFEPOSA, Central Economic Intelligence Bureau, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Delhi, as illegal and void ab initio and to direct release of the detenue - Firoz Khan @ Feroz...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›