Karnataka Court August 2015 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.
The Divisional Controleer Vs. Venkat S/O Maharudrappa
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
W.A.No.200616/2014 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE7H DAY OF AUGUST2015PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH R AND THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA WRIT APPEAL NO.200616 OF2014(L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER NEKRTC, BIDAR DIVISION BIDAR 585 401 NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI DEEPAK VISHNU BARAD, ADVOCATE) AND: VENKAT S/O MAHARUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT48YEARS OCC: CONDUCTOR, BHALKI DEPOT R/O BALATH (K) TQ. AURAD, DIST. BIDAR 585 401 (BY SRI KRUPA SAGAR PATIL, ADVOCATE) ...RESPONDENT THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S4OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED1408.2012 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.83808/2011 TO THE EXTENT IT DIRECTS25 BACKWAGES TO THE RESPONDENT, FURTHER BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR THEREIN. THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY H.G. RAMESH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.A.No.200616/2014 - 2 - JUDGMENT H.G....
Shri S L Basavaraj (Huf) Vs. The Asst Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE7H DAY OF AUGUST2015PRESENT THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE B MANOHAR ITA Nos.336 - 338 OF2009BETWEEN : SHRI S L BASAVARAJ (HUF) REP BY ITS KARTHA SRI S.L.BASAVARAJA LAKKAPPA CAMP, "LAXMI NILAYA" MATHUR VILLAGE, SHIMOGA57720. ..APPELLANT (By Sri A SHANKAR & Sri M LAVA, ADVs.) AND: THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, C.R.BUILDING NO.75, 100 FEET ROAD GOPALAGOWDA EXTENSION SHIMOGA57720. .. RESPONDENT (By Sri K V ARAVIND, ADV.) 2 THESE ITAs. ARE FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED3001-2009 PASSED IN ITA NO.278 TO280BNG/2008, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS1999 00,2000-01 & 2003-04 DATED2311.2006, 24.3.2006, PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO: (I). FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, (II). ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.278 TO280BNG/2009,DATED3001-2009. THESE APPEALs COM...
Sugappa and Another Vs. Shivashankerappa and Others
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Aug-06-2015
(Prayer: This Regular Second Appeal is filed under Section100 of CPC, against the judgment and decree dated 19.1.2010 passed in R.A.No.135/2007 on the file of I Addl. Dist. Judge at Gulbarga, dismissing the appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 25.10.2007 passed in O.S.No.40/2006 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) at Shorapur.) 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 absent. 2. Matter has been admitted to consider the following substantial question of law framed on 04.08.2015 is as follows; Whether the First Appellate Court has committed serious illegality in not considering IA filed under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC dated 6.11.2009 and pronouncing the judgment on merits? The present appeal is arising out of the judgment and decree passed in Regular Appeal filed in R.A.No.135/2007 under Section 96 of CPC before the of I Addl. District Judge at Gulbarga. The appellants herein were the defendant Nos.2 and 3 before the trial...
Chandpasha Vs. The State through P.S.I, Excise P.S., Yadgir
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Aug-06-2015
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., praying to allow the appeal set aside the judgment and order passed in Spl. Case No. 1/2011 on the file of District and Sessions Judge, at Yadgiri, dated 22.7.2011. Convicting the Appellant/Accused for the offences P/U/S 8 and 25 punishable U/S 20 of N.D.P.S. Act.) 1. First accused of a criminal case bearing Spl. Case No. 01/2011, which was pending on the file of the Court of District and Sessions / Special Judge, Yadgiri, has filed this appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. Accused has been found guilty of offence under Section 8 of N.D.P.S. Act punishable under Section 20 of the said Act, 1995. He is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1.00 Lakh vide judgment dated 25.07.2011. The conviction judgment dated 22.07.2011 and sentence of imprisonment on 25.07.2011, are called in question before this Court. 2. The facts leading to the following of this case are as follo...
Nagarathnamma and Another Vs. Central Bank of India, Bangalore and Oth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-2015
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to call for the entire records in Ref No.Ro.Recov.2014-15/33 on the file of R1. Authorized Officer, Central Bank of India and Etc.,) 1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the notice dated 27-12-2014 issued by respondent 1 to the petitioner. 2. Respondent 2 has secured certain financial assistance from respondent 1-bank. Due to default, a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 was issued to respondents 2 and 3. However, since the petitioners are in possession of the said property, the notice at Annexure-A has been issued to them. The petitioners claiming to be aggrieved were before the Debt Recovery Tribunal ( ˜DRTfor short) by filing an appeal as provided under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. However, the DRT taking note of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court h...
P. Shoba and Others Vs. Mohini and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-2015
(Prayer: These writ Appeals are filed U/S 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in the writ petition Nos. 29630-631/2015 and 29635-654/2015 dated 17/07/2015.) 1. On July 13, 2015, the prescribed officer under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 [hereinafter, referred to as the Act ?], proposed to hold the meeting for election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gurupura Grama Panchayat. 2. The prescribed officer under the Act fixed on July 13, 2015, for election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gurupura Grama Panchayat. 3. The appellants before us only filed their nominations for the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha respectively. There was no other nomination coming from any other members of the Panchayat. 4. On July 13, 2015, only six members of the Grama Panchayat were present in the meeting. The total members of the Grama Panchayat are twenty eight in number. The prescribed officer did not declare the result, but adjourned the meeting for want of quo...
Chikkajavaregowda Vs. C.L. Lingappa and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-2015
(Prayer: These writ appeals filed U/S 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in the writ petition 18066/2012 and 22581-586/12 dated 1/8/12.) 1. These intra Court appeals are filed by the appellant (who was arrayed as respondent No.1 in the writ petitions) challenging the order dated 01.08.2012 passed in W.P.No.18066/2012 and connected matters filed by writ petitioners-respondents No.1 to 7 in these appeals, whereby the writ petitions have been allowed. 2. Facts in brief relevant for the purpose of these appeals are that the appellant is the owner of certain plot of land in the village in question on which he has his house. It is alleged that the appellant has encroached certain portion of the road and brought it within the portion of his house, regarding which a resolution is said to have been passed by the Gram Panchayat on 19.12.2011 and pursuant thereto, a notice of the same dated 19.12.2011 has been issued by the Panchayath Development Officer to th...
Anasuya Vs. J. Venkatesh
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-2015
1. This petition is filed under Section 18 of the Karnataka Small Cause Courts Act, 1964, challenging the dismissal of S.C.No.1474 of 2011 filed by the petitioner herein seeking ejectment of the defendant from the suit schedule property. 2. The suit schedule property is described as premises bearing No. 5/46, Pipeline Road, Chowdeshwari Nagar, Laggere, Bengaluru. Plaintiff is the wife of one Pravardhan Rao. Defendant is the son of brother of Pravardhan Rao. According to the plaintiff, she is the absolute owner of the suit property having purchased the same from one P. Babu Sio Poongavanam by a registered sale deed dated 24-3-2003. She claims to have put up ground and first floor for her use and occupation. It is her case that as the defendant was related to her and was known to the family, in order to help him on humanitarian grounds, the plaintiff leased the schedule property on a monthly rent of Rs. 6,000/- per month. The lease started from 1-8-2008. The tenant paid monthly rent upto...
Rajashekharappa Vs. State of Karnataka, by its Principal Secretary and ...
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Aug-06-2015
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash order dated: 27.07.2009 passed by Respondent No. 2 vide Annexure “ D and direct the Respondent No. 3 not to insist insofar as it relates to petitioner to file Form No. III by way of Affidavit for granting permission.) 1. The petitioner has filed the application for the sanctioning of building plans. As the respondent No. 3 is insisting for filing an affidavit in form No. III as a pre-condition for the grant of approval for the building plan, this petition is instituted. 2. Sri Sadiq N. Goodwala, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the affidavit in Form No. III is not prescribed by the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 ( ˜the KMC Act', for short) or the building bye-laws framed thereunder. He submits that this position has been clarified by the Deputy Director, Town Planning, vide his order, dated 23.06.2009 (Annexure “ G). 3. Sri G. I. Gac...
S.P. Thomas and Another Vs. Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and Oth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-2015
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the Letter/Endorsement dated 20-1-2015 issued by Respondent No. 2 cancelling the Sanctioned Building Plan dated 18-2-2013 and directing the petitioners to seek modified building plan vide Annexure-A.) 1. With the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties, this case is being decided at this stage itself. 2. The petitioners have challenged the legality of the letter/endorsement dated 20-1-2015 issued by the Assistant Director of Town Planning, Bengaluru, whereby the respondent No.2. has withdrawn the sanctioned plan dated 18-2-2013, and directed the petitioners to apply for modifying the sanctioned plan. 3. The briefly facts of the case are that the petitioners purchased a residential property bearing Municipal No. 25 (Old No. 19-A), situated at Union Street West Cross of Cubbon Road, lying in the parallel lane of Cubbon Road and Infantry Road, Bengaluru, from M/s. Pop...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »