Karnataka Court September 2016 Judgments
Dr. Haritha Ravipati Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
R1IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE27H DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION Nos.49749/2016, 44342/2016, WRIT PETITION No.46632/2016 (EDN) AND IN WP NO.49749/2016 BETWEEN: DR. HARITHA RAVIPATI AGED:29. YEARS, D/O R.V.V.S. MURTY, RETD. PROFESSOR OF CHEMISTRY, DOOR NO.2-20-1/1, MADHAVANAGAR, KAKINADA-533 003. ANDHRA PRADESH. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE) AND:1. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES FOR KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS VICE-CHANCELLOR, 4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 041.2. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES FOR KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR (EVALUATION), 4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560041.3. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, 2 MEDICAL EDUCATION, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, VIKASA SOUDHA; BENGALURU-560 001.4. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA, POCKET-14, SECTOR-8, DWARAKA, NEW DELHI-110077. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N.K...
Tag this Judgment!S. Madhav Vs. State of Karnataka, Through Its Secretary and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2016
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to call for the documents pertaining to the notice issued by the Special Tahsildar, Bangalore North (Addl.) Yelahanka, Respondent No.2 herein dated 28.12.2010 in Annexure-D, the certificate issued by the 3rd Respondent under Section 32(g) of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 dated 10.11.2010 as also consequential official notice dated 4.12.2010 issued by the 4TH respondent in Annexure-C, and upon a perusal of the same be pleased to quash and set aside the notices issued by the Respondent No.2 to 4.) 1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the notice dated 28.12.2010, the certificate dated 10.11.2010 and the consequential official notice dated 04.12.2010 which are impugned at Annexures-D and C respectively. 2. The petitioner was the Managing Director of the company known as M/s. Bellary Steels and Alloys Ltd. The company had availed loan from the third respondent-...
Tag this Judgment!Vinodhamma Vs. The State of Karnataka, Department of Panchayat Raj, re ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the declaration of result of R-6, declared as winning candidate under Form-36 dated 31.08.2016 issued by R-4 vide Annex-E.) 1. The petitioner in the present writ petition has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash the declaration dated 31.8.2016 declaring the 6th respondent as winning candidate under Form No.36 issued by the 4th respondent as per Annexure-E and grant other reliefs. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that election to the Channarayapatna Grama Panchayath of Devanahalli taluk was announced and published in the gazette on 10.8.2016 as per Annexure-A. The petitioner contested the election for Channarayapatna Grama Panchayath held in the month of August-2016 from Yedalu Constituency under the Women Reserve Category - BCM-A and she belongs to Dhobi, Agasa community. The Returning Officer has declared that the petitioner was the winning candidate on 31.8.2016 and i...
Tag this Judgment!Rukmini and Another Vs. The State of Karnataka, Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2016
(Prayer: This criminal revision petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order passed by the court of Prl.S.J., Kodagu- Madikeri in S.C.No.89/2015 dated 06.09.2016 duly dismissing the application of the respondent U/s 319 of Cr.P.C.) 1. This revision petition is filed by the proposed additional accused Nos.2 and 3 of S.C.No.89/2015 now pending on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri. 2. The accused No.1/Chengappa is the husband of first petitioner and father of second petitioner. He is charge sheeted for the offences under Sections 324, 326 and 307 of IPC. 3. Facts relevant for the purpose of adjudication of this revision petition is, on framing charges by the trial court, the prosecution entered into trial. Witnesses PWs-1 and 2 were examined in chief; at the request of the defence counsel, matter was adjourned for their cross-examination. In the meantime, the prosecution moved an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. see...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Vinodhamma Vs. The State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2016
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE26H DAY OF SEPTEMBER2016BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION No.51170/2016 (LB-ELE) BETWEEN: SMT. VINODHAMMA W/O VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT52YEARS, RESIDENT OF YADALU VILLAGE, CHANNARAYPATNA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. PIN-562 110. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI JAYAKUMAR.S. PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI SONNE GOWDA. N., ADVOCATE) AND:1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ, M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY2 THE TAHSILDAR DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN-562 110.3. 4.5.6. 2 THE RETURNING OFFICER, APPOINTED AS INCHARGE, ELECTION OFFICER FOR PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT FOR CHANNARAYAPATNA GRAM PANCHAYAT AND EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUK PANCHAYATH, DEVANAHALLI-562 110. THE RETURNING OFFICER FOR15 CHANNARAYAPATNA GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYATH SUB-DIVISION, DEVANAHALLI-562 110, BENGALURU RURA...
Tag this Judgment!Parrys Sugar Industries Limited, Bangalore Vs. Nil
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-2016
(Prayer: This C.A. is filed under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, r/w Rules 6 and 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, praying to the meeting of the equity shareholders be convened and the meeting of the preference shareholders and creditors of the applicant company under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, be dispensed with if considered fit or otherwise, that it be convened and held for the purpose of considering, and if thought fit, approving with or without modification(s) the scheme, and etc.) 1. The applicant (for short 'Transferor company') is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'Act') having its registered office at the address shown in the cause-title carrying on the business of manufacture and dealing in sugar, jaggery, byproducts thereof etc., as set out in the Memorandum and Articles of Association Annexure-"A". 2. The authorized, issued, subscribed and paid up share capital of the applicant company is more fully specified in parag...
Tag this Judgment!N. Manjunath and Another Vs. State of Karnataka by The Secretary, Depa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-2016
(Prayers: This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the order dated 20.4.2016 passed by the second respondent vide Annexure-D and etc; This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the FIR registered in Crime No.37/2016 on the file of the Malleshwaram Police Station, Bangalore City which is now being investigated by the C.I.D. Police, Bangalore as an abuse of process of law as per Annexure-A and etc;) 1. These petitions coming on for preliminary hearing are considered for final disposal, with the consent of the Counsel for the parties and are disposed of by this common order having regard to the similar grievance urged in these petitions. 2. In writ petition in WP 41651/2016, the petitioner was arrayed as accused no.15. The background to the case is as follows: It is st...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadevappa Vs. Shankareppa and Others
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Sep-23-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 06.11.2015, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC on IA.No.19 in OS No.59/2012, produced at Annexure-F.) 1. This petition is filed by first defendant before the trial Court challenging the order dated 6.11.2015, dismissing I.A.19 filed by him in O.S.No.59/2012. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred as per their status before the trial Court. 3. Respondent No.1-plaintiff brought a suit for partition and separate possession. First defendant was initially placed ex parte and subsequently, the said order was set aside. Thereafter, he filed his written statement contending inter alia that the suit schedule properties were not joint family properties . 4. Subsequently, petitioner filed the instant I.A.19 seeking to amend the written statement by inserting para 19(A) and to contend that plaintiff and defendants were in joint possession and...
Tag this Judgment!N. Rekha Vs. The Registrar, Karnataka University, Dharwad and Another
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Sep-23-2016
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to compensate the monetary loss sustained to petitioner along with other consequential service benefit, etc.) 1. This writ petition is filed with a prayer for a writ of mandamus and to direct the respondents to compensate the monetary loss sustained by the petitioner as she was not initially selected for the post of an S.D.A., though she has eligible. 2. Petitioner applied for the post of S.D.A. cum typist in response to a notification dated 12.4.2007, issued by the first respondent-University. She was not selected. It was conveyed to the petitioner by two endorsements dated 11.5.2007 and 6.6.2007 that though telegrams were sent to her to produce original documents, she had failed to produce and therefore she was not selected. Petitioner challenged the said endorsements before this Court in W.P.No.10194/2007. By an order dated 26.3.2010, this Court allowed the...
Tag this Judgment!Shri. Mahadevappa S/O Irappa Hudedamani Vs. Shri. Shankareppa S/O Irap ...
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Sep-23-2016
:1. : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Dated this the 23 r d day of September, 2016 R BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR Writ Pe tition No.113500/2015 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SHRI. MAHADEVAPPA S/O IRAPPA HUDEDAMANI AGE:72 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O:NEAR RENUKA TEMPLE JAWALI BAZAR, MAHALINGPUR-587312 TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOT ...PETITIONER (BY SRI: M G NAGANURI, ADVOCATE) AND:1. 2.3. SHRI. SHANKAREPPA S/O IRAPPA HUDEDAMANI AGE:76 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O:NEAR RENUKA TEMPLE, JAWALI BAZAR, MAHALINGAPUR-587312 TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOT SHRI.BASAVARAJ S/O MAHADEVAPPA HUDEDAMANI AGE:32 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O:NEAR RENUKA TEMPLE, JAWALI BAZAR, MAHALINGAPUR-587312 TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOT. SHRI. MALLAPPA S/O IRAPPA HUDEDAMANI AGE:67 YEARS, OCC:MEDICAL PRACTITIONER R/O:NEAR RENUKA TEMPLE, JAWALI BAZAR, MAHALINGAPUR-587312 TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOT :2. :4. 5. 6.7. 8.9. SHRI.MAHALINGAPPA S/O IRAPPA HUDEDAMANI AGE:54 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE R/O:NEAR RENUKA TEMPLE, JAWALI BAZAR, M...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »