Karnataka Court June 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.
Bhimavva W/O. Ramu Bhovi Vs. Krishnabai D/O. Dattoba Bhovi
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-28-2016
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE28T H DAY OF JUNE2016BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.6081/2012 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN:1. 2. BHIMAVVA W/O. RAMU BHOVI AGE:77. YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. CTS No.2732, P.B. ROAD, SANKESHWAR 591 313, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELGAUM APPASAHEB S/O. RAMU BHOVI AGE:62. YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. CTS No.2732, P.B. ROAD, SANKESHWAR - 591 313, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELGAUM (BY SRI MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADV.) AND1 KRISHNABAI D/O. DATTOBA BHOVI FALSELY CLAIMING HERSELF AS ...APPELLANTS2SMT. KRISHNABAI W/O. RAMU BHOVI AGE:72. YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. P.B. ROAD, SANKESHWAR 591 313 TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELGAUM CHANDRAKANT S/O. KRISHNABAI BHOVI FALSELY CLAIMING HIMSELF AS CHANDRAKANT S/O. RAMU BHOVI AGE:53. YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. P.B. ROAD, SANKESHWAR - 591 313 TQ:HUKKERI, DIST: BELGAUM RAJU S/O. KRISHNABAI BHOVI CALLING HIMSELF AS RAJU S/O. RAMU BHOVI AGE:51. YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE, R...
Smt Gundamma Vs. Sura Nettappa
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-28-2016
:1. : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE28T H DAY OF JUNE, 2016 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.2809/2011(SP) BETWEEN: SMT GUNDAMMA SINCE DEAD BY LRS:1. KHEMANNA S/O LATE KANDAHANAHALLI GADEPPA AGED ABOUT:51. YEARS, R/O: BANDIHATTI, COWL BAZAR, BALLARI-583104.2. KURUBARA GOPALA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS2) YELLAMMA W/O LATE K.GOPALA AGED ABOUT50YEARS, R/O: H.NO.173, WARD NO.29, BANDIHATTI (POST) NEAR RAMALA DEVI TEMPLE, C.B. BALLARI2) RAMANJINEMMA D/O LATE K.GOPAL, :2. : AGED ABOUT35YEARS, R/O: H.NO.173,WARD NO.29, BANDIHATTI (POST) NEAR RAMALA DEVI TEMPLE, C.B. BALLARI. 2C) K.SOMASHEKAR S/O LATE K.GOPAL, AGED ABOUT32YEARS, R/O: H.NO.173, WARD NO.29, BANDIHATTI (POST) NEAR RAMALA DEVI TEMPLE, C.B. BALLARI2) SRINIVAS S/O LATE K.GOPAL, AGED ABOUT29YEARS, R/O: H.NO.173, WARD NO.29, BANDIHATTI (POST) NEAR RAMALA DEVI TEMPLE, C.B. BALLARI2) RAMALAKSHMI D/O LATE K.GOPAL, AGED ABOUT28YEARS, R/O: H.NO.173, WARD NO.29, BANDIHATTI (...
V.R. Prakash Vs. The Commissioner of Excise in Karnataka, Bangalore an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-27-2016
(Prayer: This writ Petition is filed under Art. 226/227 of the Constitution praying to quash the impugned order dt: 18.3.2016 issued by the R-2 vide Annex-A is one without jurisdiction and etc.) 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by the order Annexure-A dated 18.03.2016 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru- Respondent No. 2 directing him to select a non-objectionable place for his conditionally renewed CL-9 licence and make an application for shifting of the said liquor vending shop before 15.06.2016, failing which, the licence will liable to be withdrawn under Section 30 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 and the licence premises may be liable to be closed down. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the Notification Sl.No. 58 Annexure-C dated 17.04.1998, which is quoted below, submitted that the 2nd respondent-Deputy Commissioner has no jurisdiction to pass the said impugned communication/order and threaten to withdraw the licence itself on th...
V R Prakash Vs. The Commissioner of Excise
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-27-2016
1/22 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU Dated this the 27th day of June, 2016 Before THE HONBLE DR JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Writ Petition No.33226/2016 (Excise) Between V.R. PRAKASH S/O LATE MUNISWAMAIAH AGED ABOUT58YEARS CL-2 LICENSEE VENKATESHWARA BAR & RESTAURANT, No.163/277 MAGADI MAIN ROAD, TAVAREKERE BANGALORE. (By Sri B.N. SHETTY, ADV.) And 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE IN KARNATAKA, 2ND FLOOR TTMC A BLOCK, BMTC COMPLEX SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027. PETITIONER2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DY. COMMISSIONER OFFICE BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT BANGALORE 02. (By Sri T.K. VEDAMURTHY, AGA) RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ART.226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DT:18.3.2016 ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEX-A IS ONE WITHOUT JURISDICTION & ETC. Date of Order 27/06/2016 in WP No.33226/2016 V.R. PRAKASH V/S THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE222 THE PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Mr. B.N. Shetty, Adv....
Shakuntala Vs. Chaitra
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the impugned order passed by the Civil Judge and JMFC, Mundargi, in Criminal Misc. No. 165/2015 on the basis of the complaint filed by the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 18, 19, 20, 22, 23 of the protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.) This petition was filed for quashing of the case filed by the respondent herein, registered as Cri. Misc. No.165/2015 and pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Mundargi. 2. The factual scenario is, that the marriage of the respondent was solemnised with one Sri Manjunath Shettar, on 16.12.2013. Prior to the said marriage, the petitioner, a widow and a senior citizen, made a Will dated 05.04.2013, vide Annexure - A, bequeathing her properties in favour of said Manjunath Shettar, by treating him as a well-wisher. Finding change in the attitude of Manjunath Shettar, who started neglecting the petitioner, the Will was revoked on 06.04...
M/s. SNS Control Systems Vs. The Regional Provident Fund and Recovery ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
Arvind Kumar, J. 1. Petitioner is before this Court calling in question order passed by the respondent/authority quantifying interest payable under Section 7Q of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 ( Act for short) which was pursuant to the order passed under Section 7A determining the amount payable by petitioner/employer and on account of non-payment of said amount, proceedings under Section 14B for levy of penalty also came to be passed by order dated 31-12-2014. Consequent notices issued are impugned in these writ petitions. 2. Though petitioner in the instant case has neither produced the order passed under Section 7A or under Section 14B, it goes without saying that an order quantifying interest payable is as per Section 7Q which is on the basis of amount quantified by adjudication under Section 7A. An order passed under 7A as well as order passed under 14B are appealable under Section 71 of the Act . 3. In that view of the matter, this Court is of...
smt.shakuntala W/O Totappa Beleri Vs. smt.chaitra W/O Manjunath Shatar
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
:1. : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE23R D DAY OF JUNE, 2016 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100004/2016 BETWEEN: SMT.SHAKUNTALA W/O TOTAPPA BELERI AGED ABOUT78YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O:VIVEKANANDA ROAD, NEAR SHADIMAHAL, 1ST CROSS, BETAGERI-592101 TQ:DIST:GADAG. ... PETITIONER (By Sri. M M PATIL, ADV.) AND: SMT.CHAITRA W/O MANJUNATH SHATAR AGED ABOUT21YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O:HAROGERI, TQ:MUNDARGI-582118 DIST:GADAG. (By Sri. JAGADISH PATIL, ADV.) ... RESPONDENT :2. : THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S482OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MUNDARGI, IN CRIMINAL MISC. No.165/2015 ON THE BASIS OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS18 19, 20, 22, 23 OF THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - ORDER This petition was ...
Sumangali Seva Trust and Others Vs. State of Karnataka, Department of ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-22-2016
(Prayer: These writ petitions are filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution praying to set aside the order dt: 1.2.2016 passed by R-3 vide Annx-J1 and etc.) 1. The petitioners have prayed in these writ petitions that since they hold a contract for providing service in the Primary Health Centres at Bangarappanagar, Atturu, Nelamaheshwari and Mallathahalli, Bengaluru North and South Taluks, under the Scheme known as Arogya Bhandu scheme up to 31.07.2017, without terminating their contract, the respondent-State cannot be permitted to engage the services of other agencies including the District Health Centres already running and managed by the State Government. While issuing notices to the respondents, the co-ordinate bench of this Court granted an ad-interim order on Annexure-J1 for a period of 3 months, which interim order is continuing until now. Annexure-L was stayed further by another co-ordinate bench of this Court on 22.02.2016. 2. These documents in vernacular language were explaine...
Mohan Appaji Chigare and Others Vs. Sushila Shivaram Patil and Others
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-22-2016
(Prayer: This RSA is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 26.09.2014 in R.A.No.26/2014 passed by the Fast Track Court II and Addl. District Judge, Belgaum and set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 09.01.2014 in O.S.No.2/1992 on the file of the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Belgaum, partly decreeing the suit filed for specific performance of contract.) 1. This appeal filed by the defendants is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 26.09.2014 passed in R.A.No.26/2014 by the Presiding Officer, FTC II and Addl. Dist. Judge at Belgaum, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 09.01.2014 passed in O.S.No.2/1992 by the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Belgaum. 2. O.S.No.2/1992 was filed by Sri Maruti Devappa Dhakaluche, to pass a decree for specific performance of contract and perpetual injunction. Defendant No.1 in the said suit, filed O.S.No.55/1991, later registered as O.S.No.186/1993, against defendant therein, to pass...
Anasuya and Others Vs. Nasiruddin
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jun-22-2016
(This RSA filed u/s.100 of CPC, against the Judgment and decree dtd. 18.03.2016 passed in R.A.No. 26/2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Saundalti, allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree dtd. 05.08.2015 passed in O.S.No. 213/2010 on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC., Saundatti, dismissing the suit filed for permanent injunction. 1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree passed by the Senior Civil Judge at Saundatti, in R.A. No.26/2015, dated 18.03.2016. By the impugned Judgment and Decree, the lower Appellate Court allowed the appeal and set aside the Judgment and Decree passed by the Civil Judge at Saundatti, in O.S. No.213/2010 dated 05.08.2015. 2. The appellants - defendants have filed this appeal. The respondent - plaintiff had filed the suit to pass a decree of permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property against the defendants. The suit was contested by filing written statement. 4 issues were raised. After the t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »