Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-04-2002
Reported in : AIR2002Kant338; ILR2003KAR1724
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. The complaint in this case is that the doors of Temple of justice is closed to the poor agriculturists courtesy Karnataka Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act of 1958 under Section 7(2)(d).2. The facts in W.P. No. 38076/1992 are as under :Mahadev Narayan Naik is in possession of 1 acre 20 guntas in Sy. No. 22/1 for more than 50 years. The said land belongs to Hanumanth Tippayya Naik and his family. Adverse possession is claimed. The 2nd respondent Hanumanth Tippayya Naik obstructed the enjoyment of the suit lands and hence the petitioner was compelled to file a suit for in O.S. No. 47/90. The petitioner has paid the Court-fee in terms of Section 7(2)(a). The respondent-defendant entered appearance and contested the matter. They raised an issue with regard to Court-fee in terms of Section 7(2)(d) and not in terms of Section 7(2)(a). The Trial Judge accepted the contention of the defendant. An unsuccessful petition was filed in this Court by the petitioner. In the l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-06-2002
Reported in : ILR2002KAR1694; 2003(2)KarLJ276
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. This revision petition under Section 50(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the repealed Act'), is filed by the tenant against the order of eviction dated 27-6-1997 passed by the Small Causes Court in H.R.C. No. 4351 of 1980.2. The deceased respondent was the landlord and petitioner was the tenant in the Trial Court. The respondents herein are the legal heirs of deceased landlord. For the sake of convenience, the rank of the parties is referred to as 'landlord' and 'tenant' respectively.3. The brief facts of the case are, the landlord filed petition in H.R.C. No. 4351 of 1980 under Section 21(1)(a) and (h) of the repealed Act seeking eviction of the tenant on the ground that the tenant is in arrears of rent and that the landlord requires the petition schedule premises for his bona fide use and occupation. The tenant resisted the eviction petition denying the claim of the landlord and the jural relationship and taking variou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-06-2002
Reported in : ILR2002KAR1314; 2002(2)KarLJ322
ORDERN.K. Jain, C.J. 1. One M.T. Mariswamy Gowda and nine others have filed this PIT, staring that the Indian Red Cross Society ('Society' for short) is a Society created by the IRCS Act, 1920 ('Act' for short). It has been constituted to achieve the noble goal of serving the sick, wounded and other people in need of medical and nursing care. It is stated that the petitioners are life members of the Society. It is stated that the third respondent has invited tenders as per Annexure-C, dated 4th December, 2000 to develop the plot bearing No. 26, Race Course Road, Bangalore, on lease basisand that on account of high-handedness of the Managing Body and in an arbitrary manner the property is being alienated to a private party causing enormous loss to the Society. It is further stated that pursuant to the tender, four tenderers were called but without giving opportunity to the other three tenderers for negotiation, the 3rd respondent has granted lease in favour of 4th respondent for a perio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-12-2002
Reported in : ILR2003KAR2477; 2003(1)KarLJ478
ORDERN.K. Patil, J. 1. The petitioner questioning the legality and validity of the endorsement bearing No. DA/WARD.S4(A) KTR/28/2001-02, dated 26-6-2001 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent. Further, sought for a direction directing the respondent to effect necessary change of katha in the name of the petitioner pertaining to the landed property bearing Sy. No. 12/1 measuring 1360 sq. yards and Sy. No. 12/2 measuring 1830 sq. yards situated at Khatriguppa Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. 2. The petitioner is a Non-Governmental Organisation registered as a Public Charitable Trust on 5-8-1976. It is an autonomous, non-political, non-sectarian, non-racial and a non-commercial secular and service oriented organisation. It is established as a regional institute for problem oriented scientific research and result oriented field action in Rural Development. Further, the case of the petitioner is that, its organisational structure consists of the Board of Trustees which has ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-30-2002
Reported in : 2002CriLJ1998; 2002(3)KarLJ280
ORDERR. Gururajan, J. 1. Petitioner, an investigative journalist is knocking the doors of this Court on the foundation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India by way of a bail petition under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code on the following factual matrix.2. The petitioner was arrested by the Rampur police on 20-11-2001 in Crime No. 100 of 2001 for the offences punishable under Section 212 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In the course of investigation a voluntary statement was obtained from the petitioner. In that statement he has stated that he would show the hidden explosives by Sri Veerappan and his associates in the year 2000 in the forest area and also the gun and bullets kept by one Ramesha, an associate of Sri Veerappan. On the basis of this statement, the Sub-Inspector of Police of Rampur police station along with panch witnesses accompanied the petitioner and they were taken to Konganakaduvu forest area.3. Petitioner showed the spot where the hidden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-17-2002
Reported in : 2003(1)ALT(Cri)109; ILR2002KAR2550; 2002(4)KarLJ54
Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. The accused being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court in S.C. No. 135 of 1993 in convicting the accused for an offence under Section 302 of the IPC has preferred this appeal.2. The accused was convicted under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo two months simple imprisonment.3. The accused is alleged to have murdered his sister Sangeeta on 12-3-1992 at about 3 p.m. The accused inflicted knife injuries on the deceased as a result of which the deceased succumbed to the injuries.4. The tragedy unfolds thus.5. P.W, 1 is the husband of the deceased. He had a house situated in Shahunagar locality, Kangrali B.K. He was living with his wife, the deceased, and children which included a child, witness, P.W. 2. The deceased and her husband were living in the 1st floor of the said building. The accused was living in the other room in the same building.6. The accused was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-13-2002
Reported in : [2002(95)FLR1158]; ILR2002KAR5321; 2002(6)KarLJ79; (2003)ILLJ658Kant
1. The Management, appellant being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P. No. 12408 of 1996, dated 27-1-1999 has preferred this writ appeal.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows.--The respondent was working as Deputy Manager, Production Control, Naval Division under the appellant-company. He was charge-sheeted by a charge-sheet dated 21-10-1994 for certain acts of misconduct of drawing unauthorisedly certain silver materials for Naval equipment division where there was no requirement of silver parts and he also failed to store them safely in appropriate stores and he failed to produce them when asked by his superiors and other charges as mentioned in the charge-sheet.3. The respondent submitted his explanation to the charge-sheet. The explanation was not satisfactory and the Management, appellant decided to hold an enquiry in the matter. An Enquiry Officer was appointed. The Enquiry Officer held the enquiry in accordance with law and in accordance wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-13-2002
Reported in : [2003]132STC47(Kar)
ORDERM.F. Saldanha, J.1. Once again, this Court is faced with the familiar dispute that arises under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, relating to classification of a particular item. The petitioner-company manufactures a product under the brand name 'Lite-N-Soft Gel'. According to the material available before us, this product is used exclusively as a bakery product and is known in the trade as a cake improver. It provides sponginess to the cake, improves its consistency and the shelf life. The petitioners had contended that it should be categorised under item 10A under Part 'C' of the Second Schedule under the head of 'chemicals of all types'. It did surprise us slightly that this contention was taken up before the department initially because the petitioners have filed several reports and certificates before us and these unequivocally indicate that this gel essentially consists of an emulsifier which is really a vegetable based fat. Whatever be the reason for it, perhaps as pointed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-22-2002
Reported in : 2003(2)KarLJ91
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. The petitioner calls in question the validity and correctness of the order dated 11-6-1999 passed in H.R.C. No. 513 of 1998 on the file of the X Additional Small Causes Judge, Bangalore dismissing the eviction petition filed under Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (the 'old Act' for short).2. The petitioner filed the petition for eviction under Section 21(1)(h) of the old Act alleging that she requires the petition premises for purpose of running a cycle shop by her son Srinivas. The Court below came to the conclusion that the petitioner's need was not real on finding that the petitioner let out the premises adjoining the petition premises in the year 1997 after it fell vacant. The reasoning adopted by the Court below is that if really the petitioner needed the premises to run the cycle shop business, she would have certainly occupied the vacant premises instead of letting it out again. In that view of the matter, the Court below d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-06-2002
Reported in : ILR2002KAR1785; 2002(4)KarLJ152
V.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This appeal by the accused in Sessions Case No. 12 of 1991 is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, dated 6-12-1995 wherein the accused-appellant have been found guilty of offence for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 450, 323 and 376 read with Section 34 of the IPC, and have been sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default to undergo further Rl for three months for the offence punishable under Section 450 read with Section 34, IPC, and to undergo SI for two months for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years each and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default to undergo RI for six months.2. The facts of the case in brief leading upto this appeal are as follows:The accused herein stood charged before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, on t...
Tag this Judgment!