Karnataka Court October 2012 Judgments
Prakash MartIn Tegur Vs. Smt. Joyce Samuel
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-04-2012
(Prayer: This MFA filed U/S 39 of the Special Marriage Act, R/W Sec.19(1) of the family courts act, against the order Dt.08.06.2012 passed in M.C.No.3578/2011 on the file of the principal judge, family court, Bangalore, allowing the petition filed U/S 28 of the Special Marriage Act, for dissolution of marriage.) Manjunath, J. 1. The legality and correctness of the decree of divorce granted by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore dt.8.6.2012 passed in M.C.No.3578/2011 is called in question in this appeal. 2. The parties herein are Christians. Their marriage was solemnized on 31.12.2007 as per the Christians Rites and it was registered on 31.12.2007 and the registration certificate indicated that the marriage was registered under the provisions of the Indian Christian Marriage Act 1872. 3. Unfortunately, a joint petition was filed by the parties u/s 28 of the Special Marriage Act 1954. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre. The parties have settled their dispute before ...
Tag this Judgment!S.B. Nagaraju Vs. State by Arakalgud Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-04-2012
(Prayer: This Crl.R.P. is filed under S.397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order dated 25.5.2010 passed by the P.O., FTC, Arkalgud in Crl.A.No.104/2006 and the order dated 11.9.2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC., Arkalgud in C.C.No.252/2004.) 1. The petitioner faced trial for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Ss.279, 304-A, 337 and 338 IPC. After trial, he was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offences under Ss.279 and 304-A IPC and was sentenced to pay fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under S.337 IPC, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and was further sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under S.338 IPC, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The aforesaid (the word ‘said’ be deleted vide order dated 5.11.2012) conviction and sentence was affirmed in appeal by the Sessions Court. 2. Prosecution ca...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Khaleel Vs. State by Holalkere Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-03-2012
(Prayer: This Crl.R.P. is filed under S.397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment and order dated 27.4.2010 passed by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge and FTC., Chitradurga in Crl.A.No.85/2008 and confirming the judgment and order dated 19.8.2008 passed by the JMFC., Holalkere in C.C.No.339/2006.) 1. The petitioner faced trial for the offences punishable under Ss.279, 337, 338 and 304-A IPC and S.192 r/w S.66(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act and was convicted by the learned Trial Judge. Accused was sentenced to undergo imprisonment and pay fine, with default stipulation. Aggrieved, the accused filed an appeal in the Sessions Court at Chitradurga. The appeal was assigned to the Fast Track Court. Mr. I.S. Jantli, the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Chitradurga dismissed the appeal. Assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the accused has filed this Criminal Revision petition. 2. Heard, Sri R. Shashidhara, learned advocate for the petitioner and Sri Vi...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadeva Vs. Smt. Rangamma and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-03-2012
(Prayer: These Regular Second Appeals are filed under Sec. 100 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 12.1.2010 in R.A. Nos.35/2004 and 38/2004 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Mysore, etc.) 1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment and decree in R.A.Nos. 35/2004 and 38/2004 dated 12.1.2010 on the file of the II Additional District Judge at Mysore. 2. Mahadeva is the common appellant in both these appeals. Similarly, Smt. Rangamma and Smt. Lakshmamma are the common respondents. Mahadeva filed O.S.No.266/1997 on the file of the II Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Mysore, against the respondents for declaring that he is the absolute owner and in possession of the plaint schedule property and that the sale deed dated 23.9.1996 executed by Smt.Rangamma, the first defendant in favour of Smt.Lakshmamma, the second defendant in respect of the suit schedule property is null and void and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their servants or an...
Tag this Judgment!Ravindrakumar Vs. the State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Oct-03-2012
Aravind Kumar, J. 1. Plaintiffs in O.S.46/97 before Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn), Bidar have filed these writ petitions questioning the Order dated 21.11.2011 passed on I.A.No.XI, Annexure-E in so far as direction issued while allowing I.A.XI filed by the plaintiffs for amendment holding thereunder that said amendment shall not relate back to the date of filing of the suit but it will take effect from the date of filing of the application I.A.XI which was on 24.11.2011 and seeks for quashing of the said portion of the order and petitioner is also seeking for quashing of the Order dated 24.01.2012, Annexure-F directing the Sub-Registrar to furnish the market value of the suit property during 2011 to enable the Trial Court to pass orders on issue No.4. 2. Having heard the Learned Advocates appearing for the petitioners as well as respondents it was ordered to be listed for dictating on 28.09.2012. However, on the said date the matter did not reach and as such it has been listed today fo...
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Vs. Mrs. B. Sumangaladevi
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Oct-03-2012
Dr. Bhakthavatsala, J. 1. This is an Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Revenue, questioning the legality of the Order dated 1.10.2004 made in ITA No.77/PNJ/2002 on the file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Panaji Bench at Panaji, confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), at Belgaum. 2. Brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the Appeal may be stated as under: During the course of Income Tax Department Search in the case of B.B. Swamy on 10.12.1991, the Income Tax Department seized certain amount and as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the act), the same was adjusted as against the income tax demand raised against him. Further, simultaneous search was conducted at Bangalore in the residence and factory of Smt.B.Sumangala Devi (in short the assessee) who is close associate of B.B. Swamy and seized gold, cash, silverware, other valuables and incriminating documents. During the assessment yea...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Silver Springs Vs. M/S. Canara Housing Development Company and Ot ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
A.S. Bopanna, J. 1. The appellant herein is the first defendant in O.S. No.2612/2000. The second, third and fourth respondents herein were the plaintiffs in the said suit. The suit was filed seeking for the relief of mandatory injunction against the defendants to demolish the illegal structure constructed on the common areas and open spaces provided on Schedule-A property. The consequential relief of permanent injunction was also sought. The Court below by its judgment and decree dated 25.04.2009 has decreed the suit. The first defendant is therefore before this Court assailing the judgment. 2. The parties would be referred in the rank as assigned to them before the Court below for the purpose of convenience and clarity. 3. The first plaintiff claims to be a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, while the second and third plaintiffs are the members and are the absolute owners of Site Nos.A-1 and B-90 formed in the layout called “Silver Springs”....
Tag this Judgment!K.P. Shivappa Vs. State by Kollegal Rural Police, Chamarajnagar Distri ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
(Prayer: This Crl.R.P. is filed under S.397 and 401 Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order dated 10.11.2010 passed in C.C.No.254/2005 by the Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC.,Kollegala and to set aside the order dated 24.9.2011 passed in Crl.A.No.46/2010 by the P.O., FTC, Kollegal.) 1. In this revision petition the challenge is to the Judgment and Order dated 24.9.2011 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Kollegala whereby, the Appellate Court concurred with the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned JMFC, Kollegala on 10.11.2010 in C.C.No.254/2005, convicting the accused for the offences punishable under Ss.279, 337 and 304-A IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment and pay fine, with default stipulation. 2. The material facts leading to the trial of the petitioner, with reference to the rank of the parties in the Trial Court are that; a) On 21.11.2004, at about 3.30 p.m., the accused was driving bus bearing No. KA-10-A-6399 from Mysore...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of India Humnabad Branch, Through Its Manager Humnabad Vs. ...
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
(This regular second appeal is filed under Section 100 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 15.01.2010 passed in R.A.No.8/2004 on the file of the presiding officer, fast tract court-I at Bidar allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 23.02.2004 passed in E.P.No.127/1995 on the file of the civil judge (Sr.Dn) at Basavakalyan (camp at Humnabad). This appeal having been heard, reserved for judgment, coming on for pronouncement this day the court delivered the following:) The decree holder has preferred this second appeal questioning the Judgment and Decree passed in R.A.8/2004 dated 15.01.2010 by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-I, Bidar, whereunder order dated 23.02.2004 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Basavakalyan in E.P.127/1995 allowing the execution petition by holding decree holder -bank is entitled to obtain fixed deposit amount for realisation of the decreetal amount came to be reversed and application filed under Order XXI Rule 58 by t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›