Court : Karnataka
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE16H DAY OF MARCH2021PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY WRIT APPEAL NO.2176 OF2013(LB-BMP) C/W WRIT APPEAL NO.1960 OF2013(LB-BMP) WRIT APPEAL NO.2174 OF2013(LB-BMP) IN W.A.NO.2176/2013: BETWEEN:1. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE PENTAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT54YEARS, PATTANAGERE VILLAGE, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560098.2. C. NIRAJAN MURTHY S/O LATE CHANDRANNA, AGED ABOUT48YEARS, PATTANAGERE VILLAGE, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560098.3. MIRLE VARADARAJ AGED ABOUT52YEARS, NO.544, 5TH MAIN, KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN, BANGALORE-560060.4. N.R. NAGARAJ S/O LATE RAME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT42YEARS, 2 HANUMANTHA NAGAR, NELAMANE POST, SRIRANGAPATTANA, MANDYA DISTRICT.5. R. MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT34YEARS, NO.1174, PADUVANA ROAD, I CROSS ROAD, IV STAGE, T.K. LAYOUT, KUVEMPU NAGAR, MYSORE-570022.6. GIRIJA V. RAJ D/O LATE RAME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT46YEARS, HANUMANTHA NAGAR, NELAMANE POST, SRIRANGAPATTANA, MAN...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1962CriLJ560
ORDERMir Iqbal Hussain, J.1. This is a revision against the conviction of two accused who are the petitioners before this Court by the learned Sessions Judge, North Kanara Accused convicted Under Section 325 IPC and sentenced to 4 months R. I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-. Accused 2 is convicted Under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to two months R. I. only.2. The facts leading to this revision are briefly as follows: On 3-1-1957 at Kasarket (N. E.) between 2.30 or 3 P. M. a scuffle took place in a street between the accused and the complainants who are P.Ws. 1 and 2. These two are closely related to each other. That these witnesses were injured there can be no doubt. P.W. 1 seems to have received serious injuries. It is also not denied that accused 2 also has sustained injuries. As per the certificate marked as Exhibit P-30 issued by the Medical Officer of Bonnavar who has been examined as P.W. 4 in the case, the injury on the head of accused 2 above the right ear was a contused one 2'x1/2'x...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1992CriLJ167; ILR1991KAR1146; 1991(1)KarLJ266
ORDER1. The sole point to be determined in this Revision Petition filed under Ss. 397 and 398 read with S. 401, Cr.P.C. is : Whether the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Davangere (for short 'the Magistrate') has committed illegality in dismissing under S. 203, Cr.P.C. a private complaint (P.C. No. 19/90) filed by the petitioner against the respondents under S. 200, Cr.P.C. by order dated 23-6-90 on the ground of want of sanction under S. 197, Cr.P.C. to prosecute the respondents after having taken cognizance of the offences under Ss. 170, 166, 415, 417, 416 and 419 all read with S. 34, I.P.C. and thereafter recording the sworn statement of the complainant and two witnesses on 4-6-90 2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are as under : (a) Petitioner is an Advocate residing at Davangere. He claims to be an active member and worker of the Cong (I) party and a dedicated co-operator who held the reins of a Co-operative Institution called 'Bhadra Sahakara Sakkare Kharkana Niyamith, Doddaba...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [2004(101)FLR1156]; ILR2004KAR1852; 2004(3)KarLJ26; (2004)IILLJ744Kant
P. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. The appellants in these appeals were the petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 36102 and 36103 of 1997. In these appeals the appellants have called in question the correctness of the order dated 20th March, 1999 made by the learned Single Judge in the writ petitions.2. Facts in brief leading to these writ appeals, may be stated as hereunder:The first appellant-Jayhind Engineering [hereinafter referred to as the Appellant-Firm] is a registered partnership firm and it has set up one of its factories, which is known as Unit-I at Industrial Estate, Udyambag, Belgaum. In Unit-I of the Appellant-Firm, there are seven separate sections. Crankshaft Light Bay and Development Sections are the two out of the seven sections in the factory. It is claimed by the Appellant-Firm that each section is separate; the activities of each section are independent and there is no inter-dependability between each of the section and the workmen of each section are exclusive and if any one...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU R DATED THIS THE21T DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No.14346 OF2021(GM-RES) BETWEEN:1. . MRS. JAYA ELIZABETH MATHEW AGED ABOUT37YEARS W/O MR.PRENEESH OMMEN RESIDING AT NO.54 BETHLEHEM3D CROSS, KAVERI ENCLAVE9H CROSS, KANSHIRAMNAGAR LAKSHMIPURA VIDYARANYAPURA PO BENGALURU - 560 097. 2 . MR.PRENEESH OMMEN AGED ABOUT40YEARS S/O MR.DAVID OMMEN RESIDING AT NO.54, BETHLEHEM3D CROSS, KAVERI ENCLAVE9H CROSS, KANSHIRAMNAGAR LAKSHMIPURA VIDYARANYAPURA P O BENGALURU - 560 097. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI APOORV KHATOR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI PARASHURAM A.L., ADVOCATE) 2 AND:1. . INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN FOR THE STATE OF KARNATAKA OFFICE OF THE INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN (KARNATAKA) 19/19, JEEVAN SOUDHA BUILDING GROUND FLOOR, 24TH MAIN J.P.NAGAR, 1ST PHASE BENGALURU 560 078 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2 . HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 1ST FLOOR, 165, BACKBAY RECLAMATION H.T.PAREKH MARG, CHURCHGATE MUMBAI 400 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1998(79)FLR181]; ILR1997KAR2791; 1998(1)KarLJ10
S. Rajendra Babu, J.1. This appeal arises from the order made by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 16598 of 1994. One Shivakumar was working in the establishment of the appellant. Disciplinary action was initiated against him by an order made on 6-8-1992 and various charges were added to it or amended by letters dated 10-3-1993 and 28-10-1993. It is the contention of the appellant that the said Shivakumar had admitted by a letter written by him that he was forced to utilise the funds of the bank to meet his medical expenses. When the inquiry was still pending, the said Shivakumar expired on 26-11-1993 as a result of cancer the disease he was suffering from. It was stated that the said Shivakumar had misappropriated a sum of Rs.59,000/-; that he was due to the appellant-Bank towards house building loan to an extent of Rs. 1,54,000/- and a consumer loan of Rs.7,400/- and Rs.14,200/- towards the vehicle loan. The respondent claimed for payment of amounts due towards Provident ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1994]79CompCas417(Kar); 1993(2)KarLJ230
A.B. Murgod, J.1. Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 2385 of 1992 is filed by the first defendant under Order 43, rule 1(r) of the Civil Procedure Code against the order dated November 11, 1992, passed in Original Suit No. 6835 of 1992, by the 15th Addition City Civil Judge, Bangalore, allowing the prayer for temporary injunction in I.A.I. under Order 39, rule 1 and 2 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 2386 of 1992 is filed by the first defendant under Order 45, rule 1(r) of the Civil Procedure Code against the order dated November 16, 1992, in Original Suit No. 6843 of 1992, on the file of the 15th Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, partly allowing the prayer for temporary injunction in I.A.I. under Order 39, rule 1 and 2 read with section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code. 3. Since the appeals involve common questions of facts and law, they are disposed of by the following common judgment. 4. The facts giving rise to these appeals a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1986KAR532
ORDERPuttaswamy, J.1. As the questions that arise for determination in these cases between one and the same contesting parties in relation to several agricultural lands are closely inter-connected, they can conveniently be disposed of by a common order. We, therefore propose to dispose of them by a common order.2. During the period from 1942 to 1945 one Hariyachar of Coimbator City of Tamilnadu State, a Hindu by religion and a Chartered Accountant by profession, with a passion for agriculture and horticulture, bought a number of agricultural lands bearing different survey numbers and extents situated at Varuna, Janthigalli and Dandikere villages of Mysore Taluk, Mysore District, in all measuring about 120 acres from their previous owners for valuable consideration. All those lands except Survey No. 208 of Janthigalli village measuring about 10 acres, are contiguous to each other and form one compact block of 110 acres and we will hereafter refer to the area of 110 acres and Sy. No. 208...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1991KAR3614; 1991(2)KarLJ280
K.A. Swami, J. 1. This Appeal by the plaintiff is preferred against the Judgment and Decree dated 28-2-1978 passed in O.S.No. 125/1973 by the II Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore City. The defendants also have filed cross objections. Thus, the appeal and the cross objections are considered together.2. The Appeal arises out of a suit filed for a declaration that the order dismissing the plaintiff from service is wrongful and for award of damages in a sum of Rs. 25,000/-. Originally the plaintiff claimed damages in a sum of Rs. 75,000/-. However, he confined the claim for damages to a sum of Rs. 25,000/-. The plaintiff also sought for a further direction to the defendants to pay interest to him on the amount of damages claimed at 6% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and further interest at 6% per annum on the aggregate decree amount from the date of decree till realisation and costs of the suit.3. It is not necessary to advert to the pleadings of the parties as the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Article-226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash order passed by the respondent No.2 dated 04.03.2009 in ref.No.ADM-3. LND.50/97-98 vide Annexure-A and the Government Order dated 01.07.2009 in ref No.RD/33/Mu.Aaa.Bi/2007 vide Annexure-J.) VIKRAMAJIT SEN, AG.C.J. 1. This writ petition under Article-226 of the Constitution prays for quashing of Order passed by the Government of Karnataka bearing No. RD/33/Mu.Aaa.Bi/2007, Bangalore dated 01.07.2009, whereby approval had been granted for the sale of 6000 square feet of land belonging to Sri Kadu Malleshwaraswamy Temple, Malleswaram, Bangalore City. The consideration for the sale is a sum of Rs.1,44,00,000/- at the rate of Rs.2,400/- per square feet being the alleged market price. The sale has been sanctioned in favour of the Respondent Sri Sai Mandali, Bangalore. The State Government has purportedly exercised powers under the proviso to Section-62 (3) of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Instit...
Tag this Judgment!