Karnataka Court February 2012 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.
S. Anand Vs. Smt. Lakshmi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 1.7.2011 passed on interim application filed under Section 151 of CPC and order dated 17.11.2011 passed on interim application filed under Section 151 of CPC on the file of the 6th Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, in G and WC No.100/2008, etc.) 1. In this case, the petitioner has called in question the validity of the order at Annexure ‘F’ dated 1.7.2011 in M.C.No.186/2008 and the order at Annexure ‘J’ dated 17.11.2011 in G and W.C.No.100/2008 on the file of the 6th Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore. 2. The respondent was married to the petitioner as per the Hindu rights and customs on 28.2.1999 at Eshwara Temple, Patalamma Temple Street, Jayanagar 3rd Block, Bangalore and out of the said wedlock, a son by name Pawan was born on 1.3.2002. The petitioner has filed M.C.No.186/2008 against the respondent on the f...
J. Venkatesh Vs. J.P. Sujatha
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
(Prayer: (C.C.C. (Crl.) filed under Section 15(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Article 215 Constitution of India praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to (I) Take cognizance of the offence of the Criminal Contempt of Court Committed by the Accused; and (II) Punish the Accused for her aforesaid Action in the Interest of Justice and Equity. Misc. Crl. No.3168 of 2011 filed under Section 15(1) of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 r/w Article 215 of Constitution of India regarding its maintainability) SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J., 1. The complainant in this contempt petition, who claims to be the Court auction purchaser of an immovable property purchased on 11.12.2008 (according to the counsel for the accused he is a bidder and not a Court auction purchaser) having purchased an immovable property namely, a residential accommodation in an auction conducted by the Recovery Officer attached to the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Bangalore in Application No.1162/1998 has sought for i...
Smt.V.K.Sasikala Do Vivekanandan Vs. State Represented by the Superint ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2012
1. The petitioner arrayed as accused No.2 in Special CCNo.208/2004, on the file of Court of Special Judge & 36th Addl. Sessions Judge at Bangalore, aggrieved by the dismissal of IA No.669/2011 is before this com'. 2. I have heard Sri V.Giri. learned senior counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri B.A.Acharya, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this petition are as follows:- The trial court concluded the recording of statement under section 313(l)(b) Cr.P.C, of accused No.1 on 20.10.201 1, 21.10.201 1, 22,1 1.201 1. 23.1 1.2011 and it was posted to 08.12.2011 for the purpose of appointing an interpreter in order to translate the questions formulated under section 313(l)(b) Cr.P.C, against petitioner. The petitioner filed 1A No.669/2011 under section 313 Cr.P.C. seeking the reliefs of (i) to direct the interpreter to translate each question framed in English into correct and proper Tamil and to record the same befor...
P. Murali Vs. K.T. Narayana Reddy and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2012
Anand Byrareddy, J 1.The appellant was the plaintiff before the Trial Court seeking injunctory reliefs restraining the defendants from using the 'B' schedule property namely as 25 feet road which provided access to the suit schedule ‘A’ property from the main road. The defendants contended that 20 guntas of land in the vicinity of the suit schedule property including 'B' schedule property was sold to one Nirmala and that she had put up a compound wall over the 20 guntas of land including 'B’ schedule property. This was also stated to have been admitted by the plaintiff during the course of cross-examination. Therefore, the Court has concluded that since Nirmala was not made a party to the suit and the she has admitted that she put up a compound wall under the 20 guntas of land including the 'B' schedule property, that 'B’ schedule property being defined as a road, ceased to exist and therefore there was no case made out. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant...
Sri B.M. Srinivasa Reddy, Son of Late N. Munireddy and ors. Vs. the Ba ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-02-2012
1. All these writ petitions involve almost common questions of fact and law and hence they were heard together. 2. Facts of the case in W.P.Nos.33511 & 33652/2011 are. Bangalore Development Authority allotted site No. 1197, Sector 3, HSR Layout, Bangalore, in favour of one Sri Muniyappa S/o late Annayappa, under the BDA (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land) Rules, 1989 (for short, the 'Incentive Scheme Rules'). A sale need conveying the said allotted site was executed on 22.03.2011 and was registered in the Office of the Additional District Registrar, Bangalore Urban District, on 23.03.2011. Khata of the said property was registered in the name of said allottee - owner - Muniyappa by the Bruhut Bangalore Mahanagara Palike on 25.03.2011. Muniyappa sold the said property to the petitioners under a registered sale deed dated 19.05.2011 The khata of the property was transferred in favour of the petitioners, in the register of BBMP, on 25.05.2011 and the petitioners have pa...
M/S. Sunwear Vs. the State of Karnataka, Rep. by Its Finance Secretary ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-02-2012
(Prayer: This S.T.A is filed U/S 24(1) of the Act, against the Revision order dated 23.9.2009 passed IN ZAC-1/BCD and 111/SMR-45/06-07, T.NO.1087/09-10 on the file of the Addl. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Zone-1, Bangalore, rejecting the request for rectification under Sec.25-A and disposing of the written request for rectification filed ON 3.8.2009.) 1. The appellant is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The assessment period is for the year 1998-1999. The assessee while filing his return of turnover had claimed certain exemptions in respect of the purchases on goods which figured in Entry 3 of Fifth Schedule of the Act such as:- “3. All varieties of textiles namely, cotton, woolen or artificial silk including rayon or nylon whether manufactured in mills, power looms or in handloom and hosiery cloth in lengths (produced or manufactured in India) as described from time t...
R.G. Somashekar Gowda Vs. the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore City, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-02-2012
(Prayer: The Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order passed by the first respondent dated 4.4.2009, etc.) 1. In this case, the petitioner has assailed the order at Annexure ‘C’ dated 4.4.2009 passed by the first respondent authorizing the Police Inspector, High Grounds Police Station to continue his name in the register of rowdies under Order Nos. 1059 and 1060 of Karnataka Police Manual, 1998 (‘Police Manual’ for short). 2. The petitioner contends that the Police Inspector, High Grounds Police Station, the third respondent herein and sought permission from the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Seshadripuram Sub-Division Bangalore City, to include his name in the rowdy ‘B’ Register alleging that he had indulged in criminal activities. Consequent upon such request, the second respondent without application of mind and without considering the legitimacy of respondent No.3 in citing ...
Shri K. Srinivasa So KedirappA. Vs. State Represented by Superintenden ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-01-2012
1. This petition is filed for quashing the first information report in Crime No.63/2011, registered for offences punishable under section 13(l)(d)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act. section 104 and 104(2) of the Karnataka Forest Act and sections 204 405 406. 463. 465. 468 and 471 r/w sections 423 and 120B IPC and the reference under section 156(3) Cr.P.C, made in PCR No.27/2011 by the learned Special Judge as they relate to petitioner. 2. I have heard Sri L.M.Chidanandayya. learned counsel 3. The brief facts necessary for decision of this petition are as follows:- The petitioner was the Deputy General Manager (Production) of M/s. Mysore Minerals Limited (hereinafter referred to as "MML") from 19.01.2004 to 03.02.2005. the Government of Karnataka vide G.O.No.CI 1G4 MMM 2006 dated 12.03.2007. made a reference under section 7(2-A) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as "Lokayukta Act"). The references in rela...
Shri.Shankaralingaiah Son of Late H.VeerappA. Vs. State Represented by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-01-2012
1. This petition is filed for quashing the criminal proceedings in Crime No.63/2011. registered for offences punishable under section 13(l)(d)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1988, section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, section 104 and 104(2) of the Karnataka Forest Act and sections 204, 405. 406, 463 465. 468 and 471 r/w sections 423 and 120B IPC. pursuant to reference under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. made in PCR No.27/2011 by the learned Special Judge as they relate to petitioner. 2. I have heard Sri L.M.Chidanandayya, learned counsel for petitioner. Sri S.G.Rajendra Reddy, learned counsel for respondents I & II and III respondent/Sri T.J.Abraham, party-in-person. 3. The brief facts necessary for decision of this petition are as follows:- The petitioner was the Deputy General Manager (Production) of M/s.Mysore Minerals Limited (hereinafter referred to as "MML") and he was in-charge of MML from 03.02.2005 to 07.08.2006. The petitioner committed illegalities in the sale of...
Ms.Paranjape Schemes Bangalore and anr. Vs. Mr.Obedulla Khan Son of La ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-01-2012
1. Criminal Petition No. 1604/2007 is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.470/2007 registered on a private complaint No. 17/2007 initiated by respondent. 2. Criminal Petition No. 1605/2007 is filed to quash the proceedings pending in CCNo.471/2007. C.C.No 471/2007 was registered after taking cognizance and issuance of process in PCR No. 18/2007 initiated by respondent. C.CNo.4026/2009 (Old No.849/2006) was registered. on a complaint initiated by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board represented by its Deputy Environmental Officer. 3. The petitioners herein had filed Crl.P.No.769/2010 to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.4026/2009 fOld C.C.No.849/2006) pending on the file of C.M.M. This Court by an order dated 2.7.2010. had dismissed the criminal petition. 4. Heard Sri Pramod M. Katavi. learned Counsel for petitioners and Sri M.V.Ravi Kumar, learned Counsel for respondents. Perused the copies of complaints filed by respondent in PCR Nos.17 & 18/2007 initiated by Karnataka S...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »