Karnataka Court March 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.
Sri K S Balamurali Krishna S/O K Seetharamaiah Chetty, and ors. Vs. Kp ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. Petitioners herein are said to be contractors discharging maintenance work. They participated in the tender called for by the respondent-Corporation and entered into an agreement having accepted the bid to carry out the maintenance work. Annexure 'A' - Nature of .minor maintenance work to be carried out by contract agency under the supervision of Maintenance Engineer specifically provides for, general minor maintenance works such as -1) Cleaning of control room, battery and battery charger room, control panels, phone, panel indicating lamps, switchyard lighting or any other works assigned by the Maintenance Engineer.2) Cleaning of equipments like transformers, breakers, switchgears. CTs, PT's, G.O.S's battery terminals, chargers etc.,3) Recording of battery reading such as voltage, current and specified gravity etc.. as directed by the Maintenance Engineer.4) To carry out minor works such as replacement of jumps, lightening of jump:; at accessible height and loose connection. Drawin...
Sri H M Vijayakumar S/O H Mallikarjunappa, and ors. Vs. Kptcl Cauvery ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. Petitioners herein are said to be contractors discharging maintenance work. They participated in the tender called for by the respondent-Corporation and entered into an agreement having accepted the bid to carry out the maintenance work. Annexure 'A' - Nature of .minor maintenance work to be carried out by contract agency under the supervision of Maintenance Engineer specifically provides for, general minor maintenance works such as -1) Cleaning of control room, battery and battery charger room, control panels, phone, panel indicating lamps, switchyard lighting or any other works assigned by the Maintenance Engineer.2) Cleaning of equipments like transformers, breakers, switchgears. CTs, PT's, G.O.S's battery terminals, chargers etc.,3) Recording of battery reading such as voltage, current and specified gravity etc.. as directed by the Maintenance Engineer.4) To carry out minor works such as replacement of jumps, lightening of jump:; at accessible height and loose connection. Drawin...
Deepak Kumar @ Siranjeevi, S/O Late N.S.Masllamani, and anr. Vs. State ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-2011
1. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C.No. 22564/07 on the file of the X Additional CMM, Bangalore. They are accused of the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.2. The second petitioner is the mother of the first petitioner. The second respondent is the complainant before the police. According to the allegations made in 9 & the complaint, the complainant is the legally wedded wife of the first petitioner and that prior to the marriage, the petitioners demanded and accepted dowry both in cash and kind and after the marriage they started coercing her to bring further dowry" and in that behalf they started subjecting her to cruelty and harassment. The police on the basis of the said complaint registered the case and took up investigation. After investigation was completed charge sheet came to be filed. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences alleged and issued summons to the petitioners. Upon servic...
J. Chaitra Yadav, W/O. Neelakantaiah. Vs. Neelakantaiah, S/O. Krishnai ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-2011
1. The respondent in M.C. NO.39/2009 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), J.M.F.C., Hunsur has come up in this appeal seeking transfer of the said M.C. petition to the Family Court at Mysore.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are as under: The petitioner herein is the wife and respondent is the husband. Their marriage was solemnized on 08.12.1997 at Mysore. As stated by the petitioner, herself after marriage, the matrimonial house was set-up in Hunsur, she was sent out of the matrimonial house with in few days thereafter i.e. less than one year from the date of marriage. Thereafter, she has been living along with her parents, as she was driven out of the matrimonial house. It is also her case that in the year 2009, her husband has filed a petition in M.C. 39/2009 seeking dissolution of marriage between herself and her husband on the ground of cruelty and desertion.4. It is her case that since the marriage has taken place in the city of Mysore and she is staying there un...
Smt Savithramma W/O.Late.D Venkatesh, and ors. Vs. Smt Kamalamma and o ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 8.1.2008 passed in OS. No. 18 of, 2005 on the file of the Judge. Family Court. Mysore, wherein the learned Judge has dismissed the suit filed by the appellants on the ground that it has no territorial jurisdiction to try the same.2. The brief facts of the case are that: Both Appellant. No. 1 arid respondent No. 1 are claiming to be the wives of deceased late D Venkatesh and appellants 2 and 3 are claiming as children of deceased late D Venkatesh. The plaintiffs/appellants herein filed a suit for declaration that they are the legal representatives of deceased late D Venkatesh and hence are entitled to all the death benefits relating to the deceased. It was contended in the suit that the first appellant is the legally wedded wife of the deceased and appellants 2 and 3 are children born out of the said wed lock. The deceased was working as Assistant Master in Government Higher Primary School, Channananjaiahna Hundi,...
Sri.Vijaya Bhaskar, S/O D. Honnappa, and ors. Vs. Sri.D.HonnappA. S/O ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-2011
1. Plaintiff Nos. 1 to 4 in O.S.No.8609/2006 on (he file of the XXII Additional City Civil Judge. Bangalore, have come up in this appeal challenging the common order dated 24.02.2010 passed on I.A.I filed under Order 39. Rule 1 and 2 and other two applications, one under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 filed on 27.01.2009 and another under Order 39. Rule 4 of CPC filed on 23.12.2006.2. Brief facts leading TO this appeal are as under:Plaintiff Nos. 1 to 4 and second defendant are children of first defendant. The case of plaintiffs are that the plaintiffs and defendant Nos.) and 2 together formed Hindu Undivided Family and the said joint family owns one immovable property siiuaied at T.C.M. Royan Road. Cottonpet. Bangalore and other assets which have accrued to the benefit of joint family in which each one of the plaintiffs have l/3,d share in the suit schedule property. 3. In the said suit, plaintiffs filed I.A.I for the relief of temporary injunction restraining the defendants from alienating t...
Sri S M Prakash S/O Muniswamy Reddy. Vs. Sri M Munireddy S/O Late Muni ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 20.7.2010 passed by the court of the xxiv addl. city civil and sessions judge Bangalore [cch-6] in O.S.No.11198/2006,2. The trial court has decreed the appellant's suit in part by holding that the appellant has acquired the easementary right over the passage shown as a,b,c,d and w,x,y,z in the plaint sketch by restraining the respondent b way of permanent injunction from putting up any construction over the said passage. however, the appellants' prayer for mandatory injunction came to be turned down.3. Today both the parties have filed the joint compromise memo invoking order xxiii rule 3 cpc. the same is signed by the parties and their respective learned advocates.4. The appellant sri s.m.prakash and the respondent sri m.muni reddy are present before the court. they state that they have entered into this settlement of their own volition and without any duress from anybody.5. The joint compromise memo is placed on record...
Mr. R.V.Nathan S/O.Late V.Rajaraman. Vs. the Assistant General Manager ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-2011
1. The petitioner herein has assailed the. order passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (at Chennai) (hereinafter referred as 'DRAT) dated 2.3.2011 whereby, the DRAT has required the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.7,00,000/-, on or before 16.3.2011. before the petitioner's appeal is entertained. While assailing the aforesaid determination rendered by the DRAT, through the instant writ petition, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, that in terms of the mandate contained m Sec. 18 of the Securitization and Re-construction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act. 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'Securitization Act'), the petitioner ought to have been required to deposit only a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- .2. Through the instant writ, petition, we have been required to adjudicate upon the issue whether, the determination rendered by the DRAT requiring the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- was unjustified, and whether, the petitioner...
The Range Forest Officer, and ors. Vs. D.P.Ramesh,s/O. D.C.Puttaswame ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-2011
1. These appeals by the defendants- appellants herein are arising out of the impugned judgments and dated 21/04/2007 passed in O.S.No.264/2003. (in" RFA No. 1946/2007). O.S.No.262/2003(in RFA No. 1947/2007) and O.S.No.263/2003 (in RFA No. 1948/2007) respectively, on. the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.On). Chikmagalur, thereinafter referred to as the Trial Court' for short), wherein, the plaintiffs-respondents herein have sought for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of their respective lands in question.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: Sri. D.P. Rarnesh. Smt. Thimmamma and Sri. D.C. Puttaswame Gowda who are the son, mother and father have filed separate suits before the Trial Court for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants-appellants herein in respect of the lands in question, contending that, land bearing Sy.No.841 (old Error Hyperlink reference not valid. measuring 04 Acres 20 guntas, situated at Vastare village. Chickmagalur taluk, has ...
K.G. Nagaraj S/O. ByappA. Vs. State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-21-2011
1. The facts in brief are that on 01-06-2010 Sharadamma the complainant was in the house of her neighbor and at. about 11.30 a.m.. she was informed by Karibasamma. her maid servant, that while she made an effort to open the door, Smt Roopa, the daughter-in-law of the complam.ant did not open it and therefore, she complained the same to Sharadamma and accordingly, the complainant, went to her house and through the window noticed a male person in her house and immediately, she informed Karibasamma to bring the mobile phone which was left: in the house of her neighbour and by the time she brought the phone, an unknown person of dark complexion ran away from the house and when the complainant went inside, found the body of her daughter-in-law lying on the ground and the golden ornaments, i.e., Mangalasutra, golden lings and ear rings were forcibly taken away by throttling her neck. A complaint on these facts submitted by Sharadamma was registered in Crime No. 112/2010 for the offence punis...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »