Karnataka Court June 2014 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.
Rama and Others Vs. Mastamma and Others
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: This R.S.A. is filed U/S 100 of CPC against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.10.2010 passed in R.A. No.17/2009 On The File of the Senior Civil Judge, Honavar (Itinerary Court At Bhatkal) Dismissing the appeal filed against the judgment dated 28.02.2009 and the decree passed in O.S. No. 93/2005 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC at Bhatkal Decreeing the suit filed for Partition and Permanent Injunction.) 1. The defendants of an original suit bearing O.S. No. 93/2005 which was pending on the file of Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and JMFC, Bhatkal of Uttara Kannada District are before this Court challenging the judgment and decree passed against them on 28.02.2009 and the affirmation of the same in R.A. No. 17/2009 which was pending on the file of Court of Senior Civil Judge, Honnavar Iternating at Bhatkal. 2. Suit filed for the relief of partition and separate possession by Smt. Mastamma wife of Subbayya Naik, first respondent herein as plaintiff has be...
State of Karnataka Vs. R.H. Keshava and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal Is Filed Under Section 378(1) and (3) Cr.P.C. By The State P.P.For The State Praying That This Hon'ble Court May Be Pleased To Grant Leave To Appeal Against The Judgment And Order Of Acquittal Passed By Learned Prl.Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore In S.C.No.255/2004 Dated:20.01.2009, Thereby Acquitting The Respondents-Accused Of The Offences P/U/'S 302 R/W Sec.34 Of Ipc.) 1. This appeal is preferred by the State against the judgment and order dated 20.01.2009 passed by the Principal Sessions Court, Bangalore Rural, Bangalore. By the said judgement the trial Court acquitted accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 for the offences under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. However, Accused No.1 is convicted for the offences under Section 304-11 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,00,000/-. Since the accused No.1 has already served sentence and paid fine he is released from custody. Convicted accused No.1 has not filed...
United India Insurance Company Limited Branch Office Vs. Fatima and Ot ...
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgement and Award dated 16.05.2007 passed in MVC No. 143/2005 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muddebihal, awarding a compensation of Rs.9,26,592/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.) 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Counsel for the respondents. 2. The appellant is the insurance company which had insured a vehicle involved in an accident leading to the claim petition. 3. The facts are as follows: "Respondents 1 to 7 are the widow, the children and the mother of the deceased Imamsab Balabatti. It transpires that Imamsab Balabatti, while going on his motor cycle bearing No.KA-28/J-9709, on 15.5.2004, at about 11.30 a.m., to Muddebihal from Balabatti and when he was nearing Chalami Thanda, an auto rickshaw bearing registration No.KA-28/J- 6102, which is said to ha...
Rajashekhar Vs. Vijaykumar
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: This Rsa Is Filed U/S. 100 Of Cpc., Against The Judgement and Decree Dtd:02-01-2010 Passed In R.A.No.41/2005 On The File Of The Fast Track Court-I, Chikodi, Dismissing The Appeal, Filed Against The Judgment Dtd:05-03-2005 And The Decree Passed In O.S.No.89/2002 On The File Of The Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and Nipani, Decreed The Suit Filed For Injunction.) 1. Plaintiff of an original suit bearing O.S.No.89/2002 which was pending on the file of the Court of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Nippani, of Belgaum District, is before this Court as he is aggrieved by the judgment of the First Appellate Court passed in R.A.No.41/2005 i.e., by the Fast Track Court-I, at Chikodi. The respondent herein is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property situated in Nippani town of Chikodi Taluk. Plaintiff's father Appasaheb was doing business in tobacco and hence he had taken the premises in question on lease from the respondent herein and was paying monthly rent as agreed. Plaintiff's father died in t...
Ambalal Vs. Iranna and Another
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: This Appeal Is Filed Under Section 100 Of Cpc Against The Judgment And Decree Dated 21.12.2009 Passed In R.A.No.41/2001 On The File Of The Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Gokak, Dismissing The Appeal, Filed Against The Judgment Dated 07.02.2001 And The Decree Passed In O.S.No.244/1989 On The File Of The Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Gokak Dismissing The Suit Filed For Actual And Vacant Possession Of Suit Property.) 1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiff of an original suit bearing O.S.No.244/1989, which was pending on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Gokak. Suit filed for the relief of possession of the encroached portion came to be dismissed by a considered judgment dated 07.02.2001. 2. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, as many as 9 issues and one additional issue had been framed by the trial Court. i) Whether plaintiff proves that he is the owner of R.S.No.139/1A measuring 3 acres 17 guntas assessed at 4-50P of Gokak? ii) Whether plaintiff proves that t...
Pampanagouda Vs. Deepa
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari, quashing the Annexure-C order dated 17.08.2012 passed in O.S.No.252/2011 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge at Sindhanur and etc.,) 1. Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.252/2011 filed by the plaintiff - respondent herein. The said suit is filed seeking a decree of permanent injunction asserting that the plaintiff has been in possession of the suit schedule property measuring 1 acre 10 guntas comprised in Sy.No.122 situated at Sasalmari Village in Sindhanur Taluk of Rachur District. The plaintiff traced his title and possession to the property through her mother one Hampamma. Hampamma, in turn, is said to have got right to the property and possession of the same from her father Ayyanagouda who has given a share to her in the partition that was allegedly effected as prima facie evident from the mutation entry effected vide No.211 dated 18.06.1985. 2...
J.M. Urooj Vs. P. Jagannatha Rao and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: Revision Petition is filed under S. 115, CPC praying to set aside the order dated 7.10.2013 on IA 8 in OS 181/2004 by the II Addl. Prl. Civil Judge, Mysore, etc.) Revision is by the 3rd defendant in OS 181/2004 pending before the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dvn.), Mysore on the order passed on IA 8 filed by him under O 7 R 11(a) and (d), CPC on 7.10.2013. OS H1/2004 was filed by the plaintiff/l81 respondent for a declaration and permanent injunction stating that he is the successful bidder in respect of the property auctioned i.e., site bearing No.l36/A situate on D Devaiai Urs Road, Mysore under notification for auction MUDA'/PANil6/200-01 dated 23.10.2000. The bid was for Rs.27,22,000/-. and he deposited Rs.5,000/- as initial deposit. It is stated, 2nd respondent without canceling the allotment in favour of this plaintiff, has once again re-auctioned the property on 19.2.2003. Petitioner herein is said to be a subsequent purchaser from the 3rd respondent i.e., in the re-auction hel...
Channamma and Others Vs. B.M. Ramachandra Reddy @ Chandra Reddy and Ot ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: This W.P. Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 Of The Constitution Of India Praying To Quash The Order, Dtd.17.10.11, Passed By The Court Of Xliii Additional City Civil And Sessions Judge At Bangalore On Ia No.10 In Suit Os No.7194/2004 Vide Annex-J And Allow This Petition.) 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 17-10-2011 passed by the Court below rejecting I.A.No.10 filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs under Sections 63, 64 and 65 of the Evidence Act seeking permission to lead secondary evidence. By this application the petitioners- plaintiffs prayed for allowing them to lead secondary evidence by producing photo copy of the memorandum of writ petition No.3033/1987. That application came to be rejected for the reasons stated in the order. 2. In the course of hearing of this petition, I called the Registrar Judicial to find out whether original memorandum of the writ petition is available on record. After enquiry, I was informed that the registry by mistake des...
Channamma and Others Vs. B.M. Ramachandra Reddy @ Chandra Reddy and Ot ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
(Prayer: This W.P. Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 Of The Constitution Of India Praying To Quash The Order, Dtd.17.10.11, Passed By The Court Of Xliii Additional City Civil And Sessions Judge At Bangalore On Ia No.10 In Suit Os No.7194/2004 Vide Annex-J And Allow This Petition.) 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 17-10-2011 passed by the Court below rejecting I.A.No.10 filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs under Sections 63, 64 and 65 of the Evidence Act seeking permission to lead secondary evidence. By this application the petitioners- plaintiffs prayed for allowing them to lead secondary evidence by producing photo copy of the memorandum of writ petition No.3033/1987. That application came to be rejected for the reasons stated in the order. 2. In the course of hearing of this petition, I called the Registrar Judicial to find out whether original memorandum of the writ petition is available on record. After enquiry, I was informed that the registry by mistake des...
P M Gopi Vs. B M Venkatalakshmamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE3d DAY OF JUNE2014BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH C.R.P.No.555/2013 (IO) BETWEEN: P.M.Gopi S/o Late Mylaraiah, 39 yrs, R/at No.24, 2nd Cross, SBM Colony, Mathikere Bangalore. ( By Sri P.M.Siddamallappa, Advocate forSri Jeevan Kumar B.S., ) AND: .. Petitioner 1. B.M.Venkatalakshmamma W/o G.C.Narasaiah, 79 yrs, No.142, 69th Cross, 5th Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore.2. G.N.Nagaraj, S/o G.C.Narasaiah, 61 yrs, No.235, 4th Block, Nandini Layout Bangalore.3. S.L.N.Swamy, S/o G.C.Narasaiah, 56 yrs, No.142, 69th Cross, 5th Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore.4. G.N.Nalina, S/o G.C.Narasaiah, 51 yrs, No.1, Naku Tahnthi, Basappa Layout, Sanjaya Nagar, Bangalore.5. G.N.Mohan, S/o G.C.Narasaiah, 46 yrs, 2 No.142, 69th Cross, 5th Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore.6. G.N.Parimala S/o G.C.Narasaiah, 43 yrs, No.1915, 14th B Cross, 22nd A Main, HSR Layout, Sector-1, Bangalore.7. Gururaj G. S/o G.C.Narasaiah, 30 yrs, R/at Sri Raghavendra Kr...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »