Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: unlawful Court: karnataka Page 18 of about 3,283 results (0.009 seconds)

Basappa and Bros. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Belgaum ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1971]27STC241(Kar)

..... where, however, it clearly appears that a classification adopted by the legislature in a tax statute is arbitrary and unlawful, it is the right and duty of the courts to pronounce the statute unconstitutional. .....

M.V.C. Sastri Vs. Radhalakshmi

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1953Kant147; AIR1953Mys147

..... the gist of the action is unlawful failure to deliver when demanded. .....

Hamjisab Mehamadsab Shahapur and ors. Vs. State of Mysore

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1966Mys20; 1966CriLJ36; (1965)1MysLJ307

..... in a case like present one where a person authorised to make an apprehension makes one, such apprehension if it is otherwise within the power and authority of the person making it, does not become unlawful of the charge for the investigation into which the apprehension was made or attempted. .....

Syed Yusuff S/O Late Syed Abdul Rahimsab Vs. Fathimabi W/O Syed Yusuff

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2009KAR510:2009(1)KCCR824:2009(2)AIRKarR1:AIR2009NOC1169.

..... with summon of the said suit and she had not engaged any advocate and did not appear in the proceedings nor was a party to the compromise petition and that the decree passed therein is unlawful and seeking declaration to the effect that the decree passed in o.s. no. .....

Sri K L J a Kiran Babu Vs. the Management of Hewltt Packard Globalsoft ...

Court : Karnataka

..... offences are the typical reflections of 'criminal conspiracy' la the light of ipc section 120a, and well coordiriatsd intentions to cause 'grievous hurt to the already existing bone fracture in the light of ipc section 322, and 'unlawful compulsion' in the light of ipc section 374, on an employee more specifically in his crippled, vulnerable and helpless health condition, with a bone fracture". 3. .....

Nagaraju and ors. Vs. the Tahsildar

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2009KAR1671; 2009(5)KarLJ496:2009(3)KCCR1638:2009(5)AIRKarR84(D.B)

..... being a revenue officer entrusted imprisonment for threewith the respondent of reporting years and fine ofunlawful occupation of government rupees ten thousandland or initiating action to removesuch unauthorized occupiers failsto report or take action to removesuch unlawful occupants.provided that it shall not apply tocases of jamma, bane lands incoorg district or encroachedgovernment lands regularized orpending for regularization beforethe committee constituted undersections 94a, 94b and 94c of the act:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------(5) sells any ..... unlawfully enters or occupies on any imprisonment for onegovernment land with the intention of year and fine of rupeesholding that government land. .....

Sadakali S/o Lingappa, Vs. The State Of Karnataka,

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

..... proved the alleged incident, one more question which arises for our consideration is whether all the accused persons were members of the unlawful assembly and with a common object they have committed the alleged offence and as such they are held liable under section 149 of ..... though it can be said that when an offence is committed in prosecution of the common object, it would generally be an offence which the members of the unlawful assembly knew was likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object that does not make the converse proposition true; there may be cases which would come within the ..... his further submission that mere presence of the accused persons at the place of incident does not make a person a member of an unlawful assembly and such person cannot be convicted for any of the offences charged with the aid and assistance of section 149 of ipc. ..... for common object , it is not necessary that there should be a prior concert in the sense of a meeting of the members of the unlawful assembly, the common object may form on the spur of the moment; it is enough if it is adopted by all the members and is ..... for the purpose of incurring the vicarious liability for the offence committed by a member of such unlawful assembly under the provision, the liability of other members of the unlawful assembly for the offence committed during the continuance of the occurrence, rests upon the fact whether the other members knew beforehand that the offence actually committed was likely to .....

State Of Karnataka Vs. Pampapathy

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

..... state of bihar reported in (2019) 5 scc469 wherein at paragraph no.24 it has been observed as under: it is well settled that to determine whether an accused, being a member of an unlawful assembly, is liable for a given offence, it needs to be seen 171 - - whether such act was committed in prosecution of the common object of the assembly, and alternatively whether the members ..... but it is well settled proposition of law that section 149 of ipc is like a vicarious liability and if an offence has been committed by any member of unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of the said assembly or member of the assembly, then vicariously the 153 - - accused persons can also be held liable though there is no serious ..... though it can be said that when an offence is committed in prosecution of the common object, it would generally be an offence which the members of the unlawful assembly knew was likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object that does not make the converse proposition true; there may be cases which would come ..... that mere presence of the accused persons at the place of incident does not make a person the member of unlawful assembly and no such person could be convicted for any of the offence with the aid and assistance of section 149 ..... though the prosecution has proved the alleged incident, whether all the accused persons were the members of the unlawful assembly so as to attract the provisions of section 149 of ipc has to be looked into in order .....

Sri.pampapathi Vs. The State Of Karnataka,

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

..... proved the alleged incident, one more question which arises for our consideration is whether all the accused persons were members of the unlawful assembly and with a common object they have committed the alleged offence and as such they are held liable under section 149 of ..... though it can be said that when an offence is committed in prosecution of the common object, it would generally be an offence which the members of the unlawful assembly knew was likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object that does not make the converse proposition true; there may be cases which would come within the ..... his further submission that mere presence of the accused persons at the place of incident does not make a person a member of an unlawful assembly and such person cannot be convicted for any of the offences charged with the aid and assistance of section 149 of ipc. ..... for common object , it is not necessary that there should be a prior concert in the sense of a meeting of the members of the unlawful assembly, the common object may form on the spur of the moment; it is enough if it is adopted by all the members and is ..... for the purpose of incurring the vicarious liability for the offence committed by a member of such unlawful assembly under the provision, the liability of other members of the unlawful assembly for the offence committed during the continuance of the occurrence, rests upon the fact whether the other members knew beforehand that the offence actually committed was likely to .....

Ramanjini S/o Lingappa Vs. The State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

..... state of bihar reported in (2019) 5 scc469 wherein at paragraph no.24 it has been observed as under: it is well settled that to determine whether an accused, being a member of an unlawful assembly, is liable for a given offence, it needs to be seen 171 - - whether such act was committed in prosecution of the common object of the assembly, and alternatively whether the members ..... but it is well settled proposition of law that section 149 of ipc is like a vicarious liability and if an offence has been committed by any member of unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of the said assembly or member of the assembly, then vicariously the 153 - - accused persons can also be held liable though there is no serious ..... though it can be said that when an offence is committed in prosecution of the common object, it would generally be an offence which the members of the unlawful assembly knew was likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object that does not make the converse proposition true; there may be cases which would come ..... that mere presence of the accused persons at the place of incident does not make a person the member of unlawful assembly and no such person could be convicted for any of the offence with the aid and assistance of section 149 ..... though the prosecution has proved the alleged incident, whether all the accused persons were the members of the unlawful assembly so as to attract the provisions of section 149 of ipc has to be looked into in order .....