Karnataka Court May 2014 Judgments
Thotesh Gouda @ T.C.Patil and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-29-2014
(Prayer: This Crl.P Is Filed U/S.438 Of Cr.P.C Praying To Enlarge The Petitioners On Bail In The Event Of Their Arrest In Crime No.48/2014 Of Honnali P.S., Davanagere, For The Offences P/U/S 498a And 306 R/W 34 Of Ipc.) 1. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking for release on bail in the event of their arrest in respect of Cr.No.48/2014 registered by Nyamathi police, Honnali Taluk, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Nethra is the wife of Thotesh Gouda - petitioner No.1, after their marriage they lived at Sogilu Village and they lead a happy marital life. On 06.03.2014, she was brought to the hospital stating that she tried to commit suicide by pouring kerosene on her body and lit fire herself and sustained grievous burnt injuries. In the hospital, her statement was recorded. On the basis of the said statement, the present case has been registered under ...
Tag this Judgment!Vinay Karthik and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka, by Its Principal ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-22-2014
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the notification under Section 3(1), 1(3) and Section 28(1) of KIADB Act 1966 vide C1 398 SPQ 2006 dated 1.12.2006, passed by the third respondent, produced at Annexure-A and etc;) The petitioners have sought for omnibus reliefs in the following background. The petitioners claim to be the owners of the following lands: 1. Sy.Nos.36/1 measuring 2 acres 6 guntas, 2. Sy.No.38 measuring 3 acres 15 guntas, 3. Sy.No.39/3 measuring 24 guntas 4. Sy.No.40/2 measuring 1 acre 26 guntas and 5. Sy.No.40/3 measuring 2 acre 26 guntas together measuring 10 acres 17 guntas situated in Kundanahalli Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk. The petitioners claim to have acquired the said properties under various sale deeds as follows: a. Land bearing Sy.no. 36/1 is said to have been converted from agricultural land to residential user. The same has been purchased by the Second petitioner f...
Tag this Judgment!Manipal University and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-22-2014
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned regulation dated 21.5.2010 issued by the second respondent as contained m Annexure-A as ultra virus of the U.G.C. Act }956 and infringing the petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and etc,) (Prayer: These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution cf India praying to declare the University Grants Commission [Institutions deemed to be Universities] Regulations 2010, [Notification No.E6-l(ll)/2006 [CPP I] dated 21.5.2010 as per Annexure-E, issued by the first respondent, to be unconstitutional and ultra virus the provisions of University Grants Commission Act, 1956 and consequently declare the same to be inapplicable to the petitioner no.l University and etc; (Prayer: These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the University Grants Commis...
Tag this Judgment!Manipal University and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-22-2014
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned regulation dated 21.5.2010 issued by the second respondent as contained m Annexure-A as ultra virus of the U.G.C. Act }956 and infringing the petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and etc,) (Prayer: These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution cf India praying to declare the University Grants Commission [Institutions deemed to be Universities] Regulations 2010, [Notification No.E6-l(ll)/2006 [CPP I] dated 21.5.2010 as per Annexure-E, issued by the first respondent, to be unconstitutional and ultra virus the provisions of University Grants Commission Act, 1956 and consequently declare the same to be inapplicable to the petitioner no.l University and etc; (Prayer: These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the University Grants Commis...
Tag this Judgment!N. Lokesh Kumar @ Lokesh Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-22-2014
(Prayer: This Crl.P Is Filed U/S.439 Of Cr.P.C Praying To Enlarge The Petitioner On Bail In Crime No.218/2013 Of Byatarayanapura P.S., Bangalore City, And In S.C.No.1168/2013 On The File Of The Iii Additional City Civil And S.J., Bangalore City, For The Offences Punishable Under Section 341, 302, 324, 506, 120(B), 114 R/W 34 Of Ipc.) 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the State. Perused the records. 2. The brief factual matrix of the case is that one Ramachandraiah has submitted in First Information Report making allegations that, on the date of incident that was on 14.05.2013, when the complainant's wife and deceased Shanthamma were talking together, at that time, the petitioner and his mother came in a motor cycle and it is alleged that the petitioner indiscriminately assaulted the deceased Shanthamma with a knife on vital parts of the body. In fact, the injured i.e., one Ramachandraiah also suffered injuries and she disclosed the incident to her...
Tag this Judgment!K. Khathim Vs. Astrix Technologies Private Limited and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-20-2014
(Prayer: This Company Petition is filed under Section 433 and 433[fj of the Companies Act, 1956, praying to wind up the Company M/s. Astric Technologies Private Limited and grant such other and further reliefs as are just.) 1. The facts leading up to this petition are stated to be as follows: The petitioner is said to be an Engineering graduate, who also holds a Masters degree in Business Administration. In the year 2006, he is said to have conceived of a project in the business of manpower consultancy, owing to its need in the city of Bangalore with its growing IT Sector. Shankar, a class mate of the petitioner is also said to have evinced interest in joining the petitioner in the business. As they required adequate finance, Shankar is said to have associated one Venkatesh, a business man to invest funds. Initially, it was intended to establish a partnership firm. However, in order to enhance their image as a corporate entity, a private limited company was incorporated under the Compa...
Tag this Judgment!Arathamma and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka, Department of Housing ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-20-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash notification dated 29.3.1984 passed by the third respondent bearing No.HMD 82 MIB 82 Gazetted on 31.3.1984 (produced as Annexure-D) and etc;) 1. The petitioners are said to be owners of land bearing survey no.264 measuring 6 acres 5 guntas at Hinkal, Kasaba hobli, Mysore Taluk and district. The said property is claimed to have been acquired by one Monda @ Thammaya, son of Venkata. The said property is said to have been mutated as "beellu " in the revenue records, as per Order dated 28.4.1988. Prior to the said date, the RTC in respect of the property is said to have reflected the name of Monda. The petitioners claim as the legal heirs of Monda. The second respondent is said to have issued a notification dated 1.4.1981 proposing to acquire the property bearing Survey No. 264 measuring 6 .05 acres for the purpose of formation of a residential layout, Vijayanagar extension. In the n...
Tag this Judgment!Arathamma and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka, Department of Housing ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-20-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash notification dated 29.3.1984 passed by the third respondent bearing No.HMD 82 MIB 82 Gazetted on 31.3.1984 (produced as Annexure-D) and etc;) 1. The petitioners are said to be owners of land bearing survey no.264 measuring 6 acres 5 guntas at Hinkal, Kasaba hobli, Mysore Taluk and district. The said property is claimed to have been acquired by one Monda @ Thammaya, son of Venkata. The said property is said to have been mutated as "beellu " in the revenue records, as per Order dated 28.4.1988. Prior to the said date, the RTC in respect of the property is said to have reflected the name of Monda. The petitioners claim as the legal heirs of Monda. The second respondent is said to have issued a notification dated 1.4.1981 proposing to acquire the property bearing Survey No. 264 measuring 6 .05 acres for the purpose of formation of a residential layout, Vijayanagar extension. In the n...
Tag this Judgment!V. Sreenivasaiah Vs. the State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-20-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct respondents 2 and 8 to consider the representations dated 12.7.2012 and 18.7.2012 of the petitioner at AN-Z35 and Z36 respectively, by directing all the respondents not to proceed further in any manner in terms of the acquisition proceedings of the agricultural land in question, and etc.) 1. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner of the agricultural lands in question bearing joint khata in Sy.No.1/1A measuring 5 acres 30 guntas and in Sy.No.1/3 measuring 4 acres 31 guntas situated at Hosahalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore. 2. It is stated that the fifth respondent, namely, the Ex- Servicemen House Building Co-operative Society Ltd. (Hereinafter referred to as 'the Society', for brevity) is registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, in the year 1973. It is stated that the Society had passed a resolution...
Tag this Judgment!H.S. Ashwini Vs. Pre-university Education and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-20-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to issue 2nd year P.U.C. Hall Ticket to the petitioner and permit her to write all the subjects and to declare the results and etc;) 1. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is said to have completed her 10th Standard in ICSE, in the year 2012, with an 'A' Grade. She had been admitted to the Second respondent college to the Pre-University Course with the combination of History, Economics, Psychology and Sociology. She has completed the I Year PUC exams, but it transpires that she has not been issued the marks card. 2. The petitioner is said to have paid the fee for the II Year PUC. She is said to have attended classes, but would also state that she had also missed classes on account of the fact that she was suffering from, what was diagnosed as 'classic migraine'. The petitioner had written a mock test on 8.3.2014, conducted by the College. It is stated t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »