Karnataka Court November 2016 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.
Lingappa and Others Vs. Veeranna and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2016
(Prayer: This Regular Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgement and Decree dtd 09.11.2004 passed in R.A.No.16 of 2001 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Gangavathi, dismissing the appeal and modifying the Judgment and Decree dtd 19.01.2000 passed in OS No.188 of 92 on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn) Gangavathi.) 1. The case of the plaintiffs is that they are brothers and defendants 1 and 2 are the husband and wife. Defendant No.1 was the owner in possession of the suit land measuring 26 acres 22 guntas more fully described in the schedule to the plaint. Out of this extent, defendant No.1 has executed an agreement of sale to an extent of 13 acres 11 guntas in favour of the plaintiffs with the consent of her husband defendant No.2. On 20.05.1985 a sum of Rs.15,000/-, out of Rs.28,600/-, was received as earnest money deposit. Possession was handed over. From that day onwards, the plaintiffs were in actual possession of t...
Somaraj, Sheristedar (Compulsorily Retd.) Vs. High Court of Karnataka, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 30.3.2012 (Annexure-P) and the order dated 26.3.2014 passed in Appeal No. HV/EandA/5/2012 (Annexure-Q) passed by the respondents as the same are illegal, Arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice and etc. This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in B Group this day, the Court made the following:) 1. The petitioner has challenged the punishment order dated 30.3.2012, passed by the Prl. District Judge and Disciplinary Authority, Mandya, whereby the petitioner has been compulsorily retired from service, with immediate effect, and a sum of Rs. 3,20,861/- is directed to be recovered from him. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 26.3.2014, passed by the Registrar (Vigilance), as the Appellate Authority, whereby the Appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed, and the punishment order dated 30.3.2012 has been confirmed....
Chandrashekar Vs. Yellavva and Others
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Nov-02-2016
(Prayer: CRP filed under sec.115 of CPC, 1908, praying to allow the revision petition and thereby setting aside the impugned order produced at annexure-D(order on I.A.NO.2 perused by 2nd additional district and sessions judge, belagavi in RA.NO.40/2014 dated:18.08.2016) permit this petitioner to withdraw the original suit at OS.NO.54/2012 before senior civil judge, savadatti, with permission to file fresh suit on the same cause of action. This crp coming on for admission, this day, the court made the following) 1. The first respondent in RA No.40/2014 pending on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Belagavai, has preferred this revision petition, seeking to quash the order passed by the Trial Court, whereby it has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) read with Section 151 of CPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the impugned order passed by the Trial Court. T...
Hemappa Rudrappa Yakke Gondi and Others Vs. Siddappa Baneshappa Hadima ...
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Nov-02-2016
(Prayer: This Regular Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated 5.10.04 passed in R.A.No.13 of 2002 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Haveri, dismissing the appeal and confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 11.4.2002 passed in OS No.79 of 96 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) and Orl. JMFC, Ranebennur.) 1. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit property is the land measuring 6 acres 2 guntas more fully described in the schedule to the plaint. The owner of the land Sri Rudrappa took out the land for sale to meet his family necessity and to repay the hand loans. Therefore, he entered into an agreement with the plaintiff agreeing to sell the suit land for Rs.20,700/- and received Rs.8,700/- as earnest money and executed an agreement of sale on 12.06.1972. The possession was handed over on the same day agreeing to execute the sale deed after the receipt of the balance amount as per the agre...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›