Karnataka Court June 2015 Judgments
K. Murthy Vs. V.P. Muniswamaiah
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-25-2015
Pradeep D. Waingankar, J. 1. Both these revision petitions are arising out of the order on applications under Sections 294 Cr.P.C. and 391 Cr.P.C. filed by the revision petitioner in Crl.A.No.25105/2009 on the file of the Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge rejected both the applications by order dated 5.7.2011. Aggrieved by the rejection of both the applications, these two revision petitions are preferred by the revision petitioners who were accused in C.C. No. 26983/2006 on the file of XIII Addl. CMM Bangalore. 2. The brief facts which gave rise to these revision petitions are as under:- The revision petitioner was accused in C.C. No. 26983/2006 on the file of XXIV, ACMM, Bangalore arising of the complaint filed by the respondent-complainant against the petitioner-accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I Act. When the said case was posted for judgment, it appears that the accused-revision petitioner filed applications under Sections 294 and 391 Cr.P.C. along with so...
Tag this Judgment!Vijayalakshmi and Others Vs. K.R. Ananthakumar and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-25-2015
1. These are plaintiffsregular first appeals against the judgment and decree of the Trial Court which had dismissed the suit for partition and separate possession. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit. 2. The subject-matter of the suit is four items of landed property bearing Sy. No. 35 measuring 1 acre 20 guntas, Sy. No. 36 measuirng 4 acres 32 guntas, Sy. No. 37 measuring 2 acres 25 guntas and Sy. No. 74/4A measuring 1 acre 38 guntas, all situate in Kasavanahalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, which are more particularly described in the schedule to the plaint (hereinafter referred to as the schedule properties'). Bschedule property is movable properties. 3. The plaintiffs are the daughters, defendant 1 is the son of defendant 2, who is the wife of deceased Ramachandra Reddy. During the lifetime of the deceased Ramachandra Reddy, the suit schedule properties were in the possession and enjoyment of pla...
Tag this Judgment!C.S. Manjula Vs. H.N. Krishna Shetty and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-25-2015
1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 10-10-2013 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 110 of 2013 (Old No. 180 of 2012) 2. The petitioner is the wife of the first respondent. There is no dispute with regard to the relationship. At an earlier point, the petitioner had filed the petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, in C. Mis. No. 305 of 1996 seeking maintenance. The Court below at that stage had granted the maintenance of Rs. 1,500/- to the petitioner and a sum of Rs. 500/- to the daughter which was payable till she attains the age of majority. The sum of Rs. 1,500/- granted to the petitioner was to be paid till her lifetime. Subsequently, the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 127 of Criminal Procedure Code seeking enhancement of the maintenance granted earlier. The Court below by the impugned order dated 10-10-2013 has granted a further sum of Rs. 2,500/- and in that view, the total maintenance of Rs. 4,000/- per month has been ...
Tag this Judgment!C S India Vs. Additional Director General
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-25-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU Dated this the 25th day of June, 2015 Present THE HONBLE MR JUSTICE VINEET SARAN & THE HONBLE MR JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR Writ Appeal 2527 / 2004 (T TAR) Between # 135 & 137, Industrial Town Rajajinagar, Bangalore 44 By its Partner Mr Satish Goenka 56 yrs 1 M/s C S India 2 Mr Satish Goenka, 56 yrs Partner M/s C S India Ltd # 86-D/1. II Stage, Yeshwanthpur Industrial Suburb, Bangalore 22 3 Mr M K Kulkarni, 45 yrs Fabric Godown Incharge M/s C S India 9/20, 8th Cross, Gorguntepalya Yeshwathpur Sub-urb, II Stage Bangalore 22 4 M/s Texport Overseas # 86-D/1, II Stage Yeshwanthpur Industrial Suburb Bangalore 22 - by its partner Mr Satish Goenka, 56 yrs 2 # 86-D/1, II Stage Yeshwanthpur Industrial Suburb Bangalore 22 - by its Partner Mr Satish Goenka, 56 yrs Proprietor M/s Satish Textiles # K-24/6, 4th Main, L N Pura Bangalore 21 Appellants Sr Manager Finance & Accounts Texport Group of Companies # 86-D/1, II Stage Yeshwanthpur Industrial Suburb B...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash S/O Dundappa Aigali, Vs. The State of Karnataka,
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-25-2015
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE25H DAY OF JUNE2015BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G. NARENDAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.100655/2015 C/w. CRIMINAL PETITION No.10866/2013 IN CRL.P.NO.100655/2015: BETWEEN SRI.PRAKASH S/O DUNDAPPA AIGALI AGE46YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR R/O: ATHANI, TQ: ATHANI DIST: BELAGAVI (BY SRI.SRINAND A.PACHHAPURE, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT BELAGAVI, NOW REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH AT DHARWAD ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL. SPP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S482OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED206.02.2015 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BELAGAVI IN C.C.NO.02/2012 OFFENCES P/U/S193OF IPC, INSOFAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED. IN CRL.P.NO.10866/2013: BETWEEN SRI.PRAKASH S/O.DUNDAPPA AIGALI AGE:44. YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR R/O. ATHANI, TQ: ATHANI DIST: BELGAUM (BY SRI.SRINAND A.PACHHAPURE, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND ...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Timber and Construction Co. Vs. The State of Karnataka, Through ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for the records before the R2 and quash/set aside order dated 29.06.2007 at Annexure-A and etc.) 1. This is a writ petition in substance, challenging the order dated June 29, 2007 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bagalkot in RB/Vathana/CR/27/2003-04. 2. This litigation has a chequered history. Initially, the Deputy Commissioner, by order dated August 5, 1995 passed under the Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, 1952 ('Act', for short), held that the disputed properties stood vested in the State. A writ petition was moved. Ultimately, a Division Bench of this Court, by judgment and order dated June 27, 1996, inter-alia, held that the vesting of the land under Section 7 of the Act has been automatic and, therefore, persons asserting title in relation to those lands must go and establish their title before the civil court and, further, held that the land did not vest in the Stat...
Tag this Judgment!Eraiah and Others Vs. The Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. L ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
(Prayer: This appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 22.6.2011 passed in MVC.No. 156/2011 on the file of presiding officer, fast track court, Channarayapatna, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation and fixing liability on insurance company.) 1. Claimants in MVC.Nos.74, 154, 155, 156 and 169/2011 on the file of MACT, Channarayapatna have come up in these appeals seeking modification of the common judgment and award dated 22.6.2011, wherein the claim petitions filed by claimants seeking compensation for the injuries suffered in road traffic accident dated 1.1.2008 involving autorickshaw bearing registration No.KA-13/A.341 are allowed and liability to pay compensation is saddled on the first respondent in said common judgment, who is the owner of aforesaid autorickshaw. Though these appeals have come up for admission, since lower court record is received, at the request of counsel for parties...
Tag this Judgment!Suryaprakash @ Raju and Others Vs. The State Through, Women Police Sta ...
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
(Prayer: This Crl.P is filed U/s 482 of Cr.P.C Praying to quash the proceedings in S.C.No: 114/2011 (Crime No: 92/2009) pending before in the court of III Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi, to end the LIS, in the interest of justice and equity.) 1. The first petitioner-husband and the second respondent-wife are present before the Court. Both of them have filed independent affidavits before this Court stating that due to the intervention of the well wishers and the elders, both of them have compromised the matter out of Court and they have no interest to proceed with the case. Therefore, respondent No.2 has absolutely no objections to quash the proceedings. 2. This petition is filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in SC No.114/2011 pending on the file of the III Addl. Sessions Judge, at Kalaburagi, registered for the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 323 and 307 read with Section 149 of IPC. 3. It appears, the marriage between the first petitioner and the second respo...
Tag this Judgment!Savithramma and Others Vs. The Deputy Commissioner, Mysore District an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India praying- to direct the R-1 to R-3 to prevent unauthorized construction on the land measuring 1 acre 25 guntas in Sy.No.134 of Devanoor Village which is described in the schedule to the writ petition till the conclusion of the proceedings before the Land Tribunal, Mysore Taluk, Mysore pursuant to the remand order dated 19.3.2013 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.31109/2011 vide Ann-A and etc.,) 1. Petitioners claim title to 1 acre 24 guntas of land in Sy.No.134 of Devanur villlage, although O.S. 418/1996 instituted by the petitioners, for declaration of title to the said property is dismissed on 8.4.2014 and that Judgment and decree is said to be subject matter of R.A. 434/2014 on the file of III Addl. District Judge, Mysore. 2. The fact that 1 acre 4 guntas out of 1 acre 24 guntas in Sy.No.134 subject matter of proceeding under Section 48-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 in KLRM No.41...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore Vs. M/s. SDV International Logistic ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
(Prayer: This Appeal is filed under Section 130 of Customs Act, 1962 praying to answer the substantial questions of law framed above in favour of the Appellant by allowint the appeal and to set aside the final order No.20928/2014 dated 23.05.2014 passed by the cestat, south zonal Bench, Bangalore and restore the order-in-original No.VIII/13/28/99 dated 28.4.2014 passed by the Appellant.) 1. The present appeal is with regard to the renewal of the Customs House Agent (now Customs Broker) Licence of the respondent. 2. Brief facts relevant for the purposes of this case are: Respondent was initially granted a Customs House Agent Licence under the provisions of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (for short Regulations of 2004') which was valid up to 08.04.2014. Regulations of 2004 were substituted by the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (for short Regulations of 2013') and it was under the said Regulations that the respondent submitted an application on 14.02.201...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »