Karnataka Court February 2014 Judgments
Rathnamma and Another Vs. Hiriyamma and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2014
(Prayer: This Rsa Filed U/S. 100 Of Cpc Against The Judgement and Decree Dated:25.11.2008 Passed In R.A.No. 141/2008 On The File Of The Ii Addl. District And Sessions Judge, Kolar, Dismissing The Appeal And Filed Against The Judgement And Decree Dated 28.07.2004 Passed In Os.No. 246/2000 On The File Of The Addl. C.J. (Jr. Dn.) Kolar.) 1. Appellants, along with one Ramappa, son of Nanjappa, jointly instituted OS No.246/2000 before the Additional Civil Judge [Jr. Dn..], Kolar, arraigning respondents 1 to 7 as defendants 1 to 7, for declaration, partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties, alleging existence of a joint Hindu Undivided Family with ancestral properties. Appellants 1 and 2 asserted to be female heirs of the Propositus by name Nanjappa, residing with respondent No.8 - Ramappa and Defendants 1 to 7, in a joint family. 2. The suit was resisted by filing written statement of Defendants 5 to 7, inter alia, contending:- (i) the plaintiffs are not members of ...
Tag this Judgment!P. Rangaswamy @ Rangaswarny Vs. B.S. Puttanna and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2014
(Prayer: This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated: 14.09.2010 passed in MVC No.112/2007 on the file of Presiding Officer, Fast Yrack-1 and Addl. M.A.C.T., Tumkur, seeking enhancement of compensation.) 1. The above appeal is preferred challenging the judgment and award dated 14.09.2010 passed in MVC No. 112/2007 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court I and Additional MACT, Tumkur. 2. The said claim petition was filed by the claimants claiming themselves as husband and parents of Smt. Sunandamma who is said to have met with the accident that occurred on 23.06.2006 and sustained grievous injuries to which she succumbed subsequently, wherein the motor bike bearing registration No.KA-51-E-3887 belonging to the 1st respondent insured with the 2nd respondent was involved. 3. The Tribunal by considering the evidence on record deemed it fit to award a sum of Rs.2,90,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. fro...
Tag this Judgment!Sriman Niranjan Jagadguru Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Secretary ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of The Constitution of India, With A Prayer To Quash The Order Annexure-M Dated 15.12.2008 Passed By The R-L, and The Inclusion Of Yediyur Siddalingeshwara Swami Math And The Math At Kaggere At Entry Nos. 400 and 402 Respectively Under The Heading Siddalingeshwara Swami Devasthana In The Notification Annexure-J Dated 30.04.2003 Published In The Gazette Dated 01.05.2003 And Direct The R-L To Hand Over The Math And Gadduge To The Petitioner And Etc.,) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for declaration that the provisions of the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act 1997') are not applicable to Yediyur SidaaJingeshwara Swamy Mutt and the Mutt at Kaggere, Kunigal. The petitioner is also assailing the order dated 15.12.2008 at Annexure-M and the notification dated 30.04.2003 at Annexure-J. 2. The petitioner contends to be the great Viraktha Swamiji and ...
Tag this Judgment!Jayamma and Another Vs. Venkatanarasamma and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2014
(Prayer: This Appeal Is Filed Under Section 96 Of Code Of Civil Procedure, Against The Judgment And Decree Dated 22.11.2008 Passed In O.S. No. 770/1995 On The File Of The Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, Dismissing The Suit For Partition And Separate Possession And Mesne Profits And Etc.,) (Prayer: This Appeal Is Filed Under Section 96 Of Code Of Civil Procedure, Against The Judgement And Decree Dated 22.11.2008 Passed In O.S. No. 770/1995 On The File Of The Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, Dismissing The Suit For Partition And Separate Possession And Mesne Profits And Etc.,) 1. Parties in this appeal have filed a joint memo, which is signed by the appellant and the respondent Nos 3, 4(a), 7 and 8 and advocates for appellant and the respondents. Parties have settled their disputes amicably. The appellant has realized that she has no case on merits and is therefore agreeable for dismissal of the appeal by confirming the judgmen...
Tag this Judgment!Arunkumar @ Aruna Vs. State of Karnataka by J.P. Nagara Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.619/2012 of J.P.Nagar, P.S., Bangalore city and S.C.No.789/2013 on the file of the XXIV ACC and SJ C/C F.T.C-IV, Bangalore, for the offence P/U/S 143, 144, 147, 148, 302 and 120B r/w Section 149 of IPC.) 1. This petition is filed by petitioner-accused No.5 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 120B and 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC registered in respondent-police station Crime No.619/2012. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No. 5 and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondent-State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitted that the alleged incident has taken place during night on 20.7.2012. Though it is the case of the prosecution that the mother and brother of the deceased are the eyewitnesses,...
Tag this Judgment!Praveen Kunder Vs. State Election Commission and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
(Prayer: This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 22.11.2013 passed by the 1st respondent vide Annexure-A.) 1. The Panchayat Development Officer, i2th Heggunje Grama Panchayat, Udupi Taluk and District - 2nd respondent, had submitted a complaint dated 18.12.2012 to the 1st respondent, requesting to take action against the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was continuously absent for four meetings of the Panchayat held on 01,09,2012, 29.09.2012, 02.11.2012 and 04.12.2012. Acting on the said complaint, the 1st respondent having issued notice to the petitioner for appearance and enquiry and the petitioner having filed statement of objections dated 01.06.2013, after holding an enquiry, the 1st respondent having passed an order dated 22.11.2013, as at Annexure-A, declaring that the seat held by the petitioner be deemed to have fallen vacant, this writ petition was filed to quash Annexure-A. 2. Sri K. Prasanna...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Mirza Sajjad IhussaIn Vs. M/S. Bayan Bai Wakf
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
(Prayer: This RFA is filed under Section 96 R/w Section 104 of CPC, against the Judgment and decree dated 3.10.2009 passed in O.S.No. 15908/2001 on the file of the IV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, (CCH 21), Bangalore, decreeing the suit for possession and damages.) 1. Challenging the legality and the correctness of the Judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.15908/2001 dated 3rd October, 2009 by the IV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore is called in question in this appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the patties. The facts leading to this appeal are as hereunder:- The appellant was the defendant before the trial court. The respondent was the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property and also for recovery of Rs.25,200/- towards the arrears of rent and amenities and Rs.25,000/- per month for wrongful use and occupation of the said property from the date of suit till the date of del...
Tag this Judgment!Shyamarao Vs. Hanamant (Papanna) and Others
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
(Prayer: This RFA is filed U/S. 96 R/IAL Order 41 Rule 1 CPC against the Judgment and Decree dtd. 30.08.2006 passed in O.S.No.20/2005 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) Basavan Bagewadi, dismissing the suit for declaration and injunction.) 1. The appellant has challenged the judgment and decree in O.S.No,20/2005 dated 30th August 2006, dismissing the suit for declaration and injunction. 2. The parties would be referred to as per their ranks before the Trial Court for the sake of convenience. 3. The facts relevant for the purpose of this appeal are as follows: The appellant - plaintiff before the Trial Court is the full brother of defendant No.4; they are the sons of Muddurao, whereas defendant Nos.1 and 3 are the son and daughter of Aannaraya arid defendant No.2 is the wife of Annaraya; Muddurao and Annaraya were full brothers; they were said to be the members of a joint family. The family owned the lands bearing 1) Sy.No.72/1 later numbered as C.S. NO.106/A measuring 9 acres b gun...
Tag this Judgment!K.S. Upadhya Vs. the Commissioner and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, With A Prayer To Quash The Order Vide Annexure-A Dated 15.06.2013 By The 1st Respondent And The Order Dated 19.11.2007 By The 2nd Respondent Vide Annexure-B. And ETC.,) 1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 15.06.2013 passed in Miscellaneous 10-A/2012-13/ADM/7 RP 10/2010-11 by the first respondent as aisc the order dated 19.11.2007 passed by the second respondent. The petitioner is also seeking for a mandamus to direct the second respondent to appoint the petitioner as a Managing Hereditary Trustee of Sri Mahishamardini Temple, Kadiyaii Udupi. 2. The brief facts to be noticed is that the petitioner claims that he is a hereditary trustee in respect of Sri Mahishamardini temple, Kadiyaii, Udupi. With regard to the order dated 19.11.2007 (Annexure-B) wherein the petitioner's claim had been declined, the petitioner had assailed the same before this Court in W.P.No.6255/2...
Tag this Judgment!Mehtabsab Vs. Yusuf and Another
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions Are Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India Praying To Issue Order Or Writ In The Nature Of Certiorari Quashing Order Dated 23.06.2008 Vide Annexure-D Passed In Misc.Application No.55/2005 By The 1st Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) Bijapur And Which Is Confirmed In Ma No. 17/2008 By The Learned Ii Addl. District Judge, Bijapur And Consequently Condone The Deiay In Filing An Application By Setting Aside The Exparte Award Dated 13.09.2002 In Mvc No.985/1995.) 1. The Second Additional District Judge, Bijapur, has refused to condone the delay in filing Miscellaneous Appeal No. 17/2008. 2. The records reveal that MVC No.985/ 1995 was disposed of on 13.09.2002 by MACT-VI, Bijapur. Petitioner herein filed application for setting aside the exparte award dated 13.09.2002 in Miscellaneous Application No.55/2005 under Order - IX Rule 13 CPC. The same came to be dismissed by the First Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bijapur, on 23.06.2008. T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »