Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2006CriLJ1573; I(2006)DMC769; ILR2006KAR1621; 2006(1)KarLJ577
ORDERV. Jagannathan, J.1. In this petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C., the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 13944 of 2004 on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.2. The brief facts necessary for the purpose of deciding the case are to the effect that the petitioner lodged the complaint with Vijayanagar Police against her husband Hidayathulla and his family members on the ground that subsequent to the marriage on 9-3-1998, the petitioner was harassed by her husband's family in connection with demand of dowry of Rs. 3,00,000/- along with one house, jewels and other household articles and the petitioner underwent torture both physically and mentally by her husband's family, which finally led the complainant to lodge the complaint which ultimately came to be registered as C.C. No. 13944 of 2004 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2006(2)KarLJ224
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner, questioning the correctness of the order dated 30th November, 2002 in proceedings No. KPR: (A)5:2002-03 on the file of the second respondent vide Annexure-J, has presented the instant writ petition.2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, the petitioner has been allotted a site bearing No. 37 of Bommathimmanahalli, Madhugiri Taluk, Tumkur District and after verification, the same has been certified in the mutation register by the Adhyaksha of the Grama Panchayat, Kavanadala, Madhugiri Taluk vide Annexure-A in M.R. No. 36 of 1998-99, dated 16th September, 1998. Assailing the correctness of the mutation entry dated 16th September, 1998 vide Annexure-A, the third respondent herein has filed the appeal on the file of the second respondent-Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Madhugiri Taluk, Tumkur District under Section 269 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 and the appeal filed by third respondent had come up for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2006(2)KarLJ355
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner has sought for declaration of result of election and return of election Form 32, dated 27th December, 2005 and declare that, Smt. R. Nagarathna, respondent 1 herein to fill the seat in Zilla Panchayat from 23 Belagola Constituency, Mandya, reserved for ST women by the second respondent vide Annexure-B.2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, the petitioner is an elected member of the Mandya District Zilla Panchayat, Mandya from Thaggahalli Zilla Panchayat constituency for the term of 2005-2010. Further, it is the grievance of petitioner in the instant writ petition that, Smt. Sakamma an elected candidate from the reserved constituency, from where the first respondent has been declared as elected, has given a complaint to the District Caste Verification Committee on the ground that, the first respondent is not entitled to contest the election from the ST reserved constituency category for the reason that, the said firs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2006(2)KarLJ464
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioners herein, assailing the decision of the Administrator, Taluk Panchayat, Mulbagal, dated 13th September, 2005 regarding preparation of annual plan for the year 2005-06 for implementation of the Rural Rozgar Scheme vide Annexures-D and E, have presented the instant writ petition.2. Petitioners herein claim to be former elected members of the Taluk Panchayat, Mulbagal-third respondent herein, which is a statutory body, performing its functions under Schedule II of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. The petitioners herein and other elected members of the Taluk Panchayat, during their previous term, had prepared an annual plan in respect of Rural Rozgar Scheme for the year 2005-06 pertaining to the execution of various works for the benefit of people living in rural areas along with the list of works relating to formation of public roads, drainage, culverts, maintenance and construction of schools and maintenance of minor irrigation works and promotio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2006KAR1888; 2006(2)KarLJ360
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 20-1-2006 in proceedings No. KA/IM/PARAVAVI/TENDER/CHI.PURA/ SA.IM. 1/05-06,3584 vide Annexure-C on the file of the 2nd respondent filed the instant writ petition. Further the petitioner sought for a direction to the 2nd respondent-authority to issue work orders.2. The grievance made by the petitioner in the instant petition is that, he claiming to be Class II, Civil Contractor-cum-a Gram Panchayat member of the Thimmanayakanahalli Panchayat has filed his tender pursuance to the tender notification issued by the 2nd respondent dated 16-9-2005 vide Annexure-R1 produced by the 2nd respondent along with his objections. His tender being the lowest amongst other contractors who have participated in the tender, the same has been accepted without any justification, he was under a fond hope that he will get the work order from the Competent Authority-2nd respondent. Be that as it may. To the shock and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2006KAR2761; 2006(2)KarLJ641
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The learned Government Pleader accepts notice for respondents 1 to 3.2. The petitioner questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 22nd February, 2000 in proceedings No. MUN:5:99-2000 on the file of the 3rd respondent vide Annexure-J and the order dated 20th November, 2002 in proceedings No. PN:SPR:GG:CR: 143:2002-03 on the file of the 2nd respondent vide Annexure-K presented the instant writ petition.3. The deceased husband of the 5th respondent herein had filed an application for grant of land to the petitioner-Town Panchayat, Koppa in respect of property measuring 221x98+22/2 sq.ft. bearing Assessment No. 1118/84-85. The said request had been considered by the then Municipality which has now become Town Panchayat, Koppa and the same was granted by a resolution of the Council dated 30th April, 1962 for a sum of Rs. 1,770/- but, only a sum of Rs. 750/- was paid and remaining Rs. 1,020/- was not paid. In view of the non-payment of remaining amount wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2006Kant165; 2006(3)KarLJ637
Anand Byrareddy, J. 1. The petition of the appellants seeking probate of the Will of the father of appellant No. 1 having been converted into a suit, on contest, and having been dismissed on merits, the present appeal is filed.2. The facts are as follows :3. The appellants namely the widow, two sons and the daughter of the testator were the plaintiffs before the trial court, Three other sons of the testator were the defendants.The principal issue before the trial court was, whether the testator was of a sound disposing state of mind when the Will dated 15.6.1996 was executed.The widow of the testator,, aged 70 years and two others had tendered evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs. Defendant No. 3 was examined on behalf of the defendants.The testator was aged 85 years on the date of execution of the Will. From a reading of the judgment, fix' trial court has addressed itself to the suspicious circumstances alleged by the defendants and has accepted that the testator was physically and me...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioners 1 to 19, questioning the legality and validity of the impugned notices vide Annexures-D1 to D13, issued by the 2nd respondent dated 3-3-2006, bearing even No. Sain:Gra:A:Pa:27:JiPaSa:2006 and declare and quash the said notices as totally devoid of bona fides, the authority of law and as arbitrary and capricious, have presented this writ petition. Further, the petitioners have sought for a direction calling upon the 1st respondent to enquire into and take the required remedial action against the 3rd respondent for the usurpation and assumption of the powers of the Government that the 3rd respondent has resorted to in issuing the impugned notices dated 3-3-2006 mentioned above, and ensure the rule of law adumbrated in Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 2. The only grievance made out by the petitioners in this writ petition is that, all these petitioners are duly elected members of the 4th respondent-Taluk Panchayat. The first meeting of the sai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj2266; 2006(4)WLC210
Rajesh Balia, J.1. In newspaper 'Lok Sammat' published from Sri Ganganagar dated 24.2.2001, the following Headline was published.2. Under the detailed report dated 24.2.2001, it was stated firstly that addressing hundreds of workers assembled in front of Collectorate, Sriganganagar, the leaders of communist Party levelled sharp allegations against judiciary. Incriminating statements were attributed to Het Ram Beniwal, Navrang Choudhary, Bhuramal Swami, Advocate, Hardeep Singh and Sheopat Singh. Following statements were attributed to the respective speakers:3. The petitioner Raghuveer Singh considering that aforesaid statement reported in 'Lok Sammat' scandalized and lowered the authority of the Court and tended to scandalize the Court and tended to lower the authority of the Court by creating apprehension in the minds of people regarding integrity, ability and fairness of the Court in administering the laws and justice as well as affecting fair trial of a pending casein the courts bel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2006KAR1872; 2006(3)KarLJ420
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. The petitioner-Govind Krishnarao is knocking the doors of this Court for the purpose of setting aside the order of the Land Tribunal, Dharwad dated 26-4-1979 in this Writ Petition. Sy.No. 54 measures 3 acres 6 guntas. It is situated in Lakamanahalli Village, Dharwad Taluk. The said land was taken by the Court of wards when the petitioner was a minor due to the insanity of the father of the petitioner The District Judge, Dharwad appointed the Deputy Commissioner as Court of wards. The property was under the management of the Court of wards. Thereafter, the Court discharged the management of wards.2. The 3rd respondent filed Form No. 7 seeking occupancy rights. In Form No. 7, he has shown one Sri. Ananth Venkatesh Deshpande, Ganapathrao V Deshpande and the petitioner as the landlord in respect of Sy.No. 24. Sri Ganapath Rao and Anath Venkatesh Deshpande are the brothers of the petitioner's grandfather Sri. Anantrao Venkatesh Deshpande had died on 30-4-1958 Sri Gan...
Tag this Judgment!