Karnataka Court March 2017 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.
Hemanth, Since Minor Rep. by Father Krishnamurthy and Others Vs. State ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
(Prayer: This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the Order/Letter Dated 07.12.2016 regarding change of Earlier System/Pattern of Question Paper of 10th Standard for the Forthcoming Exams of 2017 in Month of March, addressed to the Deputy Director to take necessary steps in this regard at Annex-Band etc.) 1. The petitioners have challenged the order/letter dated 7.12.2016 regarding change of earlier system/pattern of question papers of 10th Standard for the forthcoming Exams of 2017. 2. Petitioners are studying in X Standard in different Schools. It is contended, the 2nd respondent has designed a new pattern of question papers for forthcoming Examination scheduled to be held from 30th March 2017. The different pattern of question paper now set up by the 2nd respondent is made known to the students only in the fag end of the academic year. 3. The learned counsel Smt. Suman Hegde, appearing for the petitioners would contend that the pre...
Hemanth, Since Minor Rep. by Father Krishnamurthy and Others Vs. State ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
(Prayer: This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the Order/Letter Dated 07.12.2016 regarding change of Earlier System/Pattern of Question Paper of 10th Standard for the Forthcoming Exams of 2017 in Month of March, addressed to the Deputy Director to take necessary steps in this regard at Annex-Band etc.) 1. The petitioners have challenged the order/letter dated 7.12.2016 regarding change of earlier system/pattern of question papers of 10th Standard for the forthcoming Exams of 2017. 2. Petitioners are studying in X Standard in different Schools. It is contended, the 2nd respondent has designed a new pattern of question papers for forthcoming Examination scheduled to be held from 30th March 2017. The different pattern of question paper now set up by the 2nd respondent is made known to the students only in the fag end of the academic year. 3. The learned counsel Smt. Suman Hegde, appearing for the petitioners would contend that the pre...
Munianjanappa and Others Vs. Bangalore Development Authority, Rep. by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the Respondents to execute Sale deed in so far as Petitioner Schedule Properties which was allotted by the Respondents to the Petitioner vide Annx-A to A15 and etc.) 1. These writ petitions are filed seeking a writ of mandamus against respondents - Bangalore Development Authority (for short, 'BDA'), the Executive Engineer, BDA and the State of Karnataka represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Department, to execute sale deed as regards the petition schedule properties which have been allotted in favour of the petitioners by the respondents vide Annexures-A to A15 as per allotment orders dated 09.02.2016, 11.02.2016 and 15.03.2016. In all, 15 sites totally measuring around 39,289 WP 37184-200/2016 square feet have been allotted as alternative land by the BDA in favour of the petitioners. 2. The allotment was made in lieu of utilization of land to an exte...
Abdul Majeed and Others Vs. Chandrakanth and Others
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
1. Petitioners are before this Court aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court whereby their application filed under Section 37 read with 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 ('Act' for brevity) and Section 151 of CPC, for collecting the duty and penalty on an agreement of sale dated 2.4.2002 is rejected on the ground that unregistered agreement of sale is not admissible in evidence, hence, the question of collecting the stamp duty and penalty does not arise at all. 2. Sri. Apparao Sugoor, learned Counsel for the petitioners (plaintiffs) submits that the original plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of the contract and for perpetual injunction against the defendant/respondent herein and at the same time, the respondent has also filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the plaintiff in O.S. No.77/2011. Both suits are dubbed and are tried together. The plaintiff since was well acquainted with the defendant entered into contract to purchase the suit property for a con...
Chinnegowda Rice Mill, Represented by its Proprietor, M.C. Thimmegowda ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the Notice Dated 10.03.2016 issued by R-2 AT Annexure-L and Direct R-2 to pay to the Petitioner a Sum of Rs.1,74,875/- being the Hulling Charges for the Season 2013-14 and the Security Deposit of Rs.50,000/- and also pay the Hulling Charges and the Transportation Charges for the Season 2014-15 along with Interest at 12% P.A.) 1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the communication/notice dated 10.03.2016 impugned at Annexure-L to the petition. In that light, the petitioner is seeking issue of mandamus to direct the second respondent to pay to the petitioner a sum of Rs.1,74,875/- being the hulling charges for the season 2013-14 and also return the security deposit of Rs.50,000/- and further pay the hulling and transportation charges for the season 2014-15. 2. The petitioner is a Rice Mill owner, to whom the paddy was delivered for hulling which is regulated under the Karnatak...
Dhyan Foundation Gau Raksha Trust, Represented by its Authorised Signa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
(Prayer: This Crl.P is filed u/s.482 Cr.P.C praying to set aside the Impugned Judgment and Order Dated 13.12.2016 in Crl.RP.No.82/2016 passed by the II addl. Dist. and S.J., Tumakuru and Confirm the Order Dated 22.09.2016 passed by the Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sira in CR.No.203/2016.) 1. In this petition filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner has called in question the order dated 13.12.2016 passed by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, in Crl.R.P.No.82/2016 reversing the order passed by the Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sira in Cr.No.203/2016 dated 22.9.2016. 2. Brief facts essential for the disposal of the petition are as follows: The respondent No.1 Kallambella Police seized seven cattle (oxen) under PF No.134/2016 and registered a case against second respondent C.Jayaprakash for the offences punishable under section 429 of Indian Penal Code, sections 4, 8, 9 and 11 of the Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Prevention Act 1964, section 11(1)(...
Abdul Majeed S/O Mohd. Hussain Vs. Chandrakanth S/O Marthandappa Ejeri
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE8h DAY OF MARCH2017BEFORE THE HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA WRIT PETITION NO.206395/2015 (GM-CPC) Between:1. Abdul Majeed S/o Mohd.Hussain Merchant Age:58. years Occ: Agriculture R/o Shahabad Tq. Chittapur Dist: Kalaburagi (Since deceased through his LRs amended as per order of the Court dt.27.5.2011) i) Quamurunisha Begum W/o Abdul Majeed Merchant Age:50. years Occ: Household & Agriculture ii) Arshed Majeed S/o Abdul Majeed Merchant Age:30. years Occ: Agriculture & Business iii) Umama D/o Abdul Majeed Merchant Age:24. years 2 Occ: Student iv) Mohd.Ibrahim S/o Abdul Majeed Merchant Age:15. years Minor is u/g of his natural mother LR No.1 of the plaintiff. All are R/o Shahabad Tq: Chittapur Dist: Kalaburagi. (By Sri.Apparao Sugoor, Adv.) And: Chandrakanth S/o Marthandappa Ejeri Aged about 58 years Occ: Private Business R/o Laxmi Gunj Shahabad Tq: Chittapur Dist: Kalaburagi. (By Sri Ravi B.Patil, Adv.) Petitioners Respo...
Hemanth Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE8H DAY OF MARCH, 2017 BEFORE THE HONBLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.P.No.5226/2017 (EDN RES) BETWEEN :1. HEMANTH2 SINCE MINOR REP. BY FATHER:KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT48YEARS OCCUPATION:PVT. JOB R/O VINAYAKA LAYOUT, HEBBAL, KEMPAPURA, BANGALORE-560 024 ICHAL JAIN SINCE MINOR REP. BY GRAND MOTHER:PADMINI AGED ABOUT49YEARS OCCUPATION:LABOUR R/O NO.552, 14TH B CROSS, BUVANESHAWARNAGAR, KEMPAPURA-560 024 3. ASHWANI SINCE MINOR REP BY GRAND MOTHER:PADMA AGED ABOUT38YEARS OCCUPATION:LABOUR R/O NO.12/1, YELLAMMA ROAD, KEMPAPUR, HEBBAL, BANGALORE-560 024 4. MARILINGA SINCE MINOR REP. BY GRAND MOTHER:MARIYAMMA AGED ABOUT42YEARS - 2 - OCCUPATION:HOUSE WIFE, R/O234, 2ND CROSS, CHIRANJAVI LAYOUT, KEMPAPUR, HEBBAL, BANGALORE-560 024 5. VISHWAS6 SINCE HE IS MINOR REP. BY GRAND FATHER:SHANKAR AGED ABOUT35YEARS, OCCUPATION:BUSINESS, R/O62, I MAIN, VENKATAGOUDA LAYOUT, KEMPAPURA, HEBBAL, BANGALORE-560 024 ICHALL SINCE MINOR REP. BY FATHER:AHAL AGED...
Nandi Agro Vet, Through its Proprietor S. Sundar Vs. The State of Karn ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-2017
(Prayer: This Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash the Office Order Dtd.22.04.2016 Vide Annex-A passed by the R-3, i.e. Commissioner, AH and VS through which four products of the Petitioner which were awarded on rate contract has been kept under Abeyance and direct the R-1 and 2 to consider its Representations Dated 01.07.2016, Vide Annexures-B and C, within a Reasonable Period and etc.) 1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the office order dated 22.04.2016 impugned at Annexure-A to the petition. In that light, the petitioner is seeking issue of mandamus to direct respondents NO.1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 01.07.2016 within a reasonable period. 2. The petitioner which is a proprietorship concern, as a small scale industry is engaged in the manufacture and marketing of products in the field of sericulture, horticulture and animal husbandry. The Karnataka Government in order to encourage the dairy f...
Lt Col D. S. Choudhary and Others Vs. Union of India, Through the Secr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-2017
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the Policy Dated 30.01.2015 issued by 4th Respondent - Director General (Land Work Estate (LWE)/Policy (Quarter) along with letter disseminated by Respondent No.7 under Communication Dated 16.04.2015 to local Station Units, as the same is Highly Arbitrary Illegal and Contrary to Special Army Order Sao 10/S/86 provision of Accommodation and Allied Services and Recovery of Quartering Charges from Service Officers (issued by Chief of Army Staff) and para 1025 of Defense Service Regulations 1986 which is a Government Order having provisions regarding vacation of Married Quarters (Annexure-A) and etc.) 1. Twelve Army Officers have approached this Court by filing different writ petitions, wherein they have challenged the legality of the Circular dated 30.01.2015, with regard to entitlement and grant of accommodation to army officers on study leave. The Quarter Master Generals Branch,...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »