Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: karnataka dharwad Year: 2012 Page 1 of about 8 results (0.022 seconds)

Aug 03 2012 (HC)

Vishnu Vs. Abdulgani

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Aug-03-2012

..... denied his signature on this agreement of sale. p.w.1 has examined himself and also the scribe of the document as p.w.2. p.w.3 is the mediator, who brought about the sale transaction. all of them have spoken about the execution of the agreement of sale and signing of the said document by the defendant. the plaintiff .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 2012 (HC)

Ashok Vs. Pandurang and Others

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Aug-21-2012

dr. k. bhakthavatsala, j. 1. in view of the order dated 31.5.2012 made in w pno.67926/2011 by learned single judge, honble chief justice by his special order dated 21.6.2012, has referred the following question to answer by this larger bench: ??whether orders made under section 136(2) of the karnataka land revenue act, 1964 (in short, ??the land revenue act) by the assistant commissioner in appeals preferred against the orders made under sub-section (4) or entry certified under sub-section (6) of section 129 of the land revenue act, are subject to revision by deputy commissioner under sub-section(3) of section 136 of the land revenue act? ? 2. brief facts leading to the reference may be stated as under: petitioner filed the above writ petition under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india against the respondents, for quashing the order in no.rts/ap/109/09-10 dated 23.5.2011 at annexure-c on the file of respondent no.3/assistant commissioner, chikodi, and order passed in no.rb/rta/113/2011-12 dated 12.10.2011 at annexure-e on the file of respondent no.4/deputy commissioner, belgaum. it is the case of the petitioner that the land measuring 6 acres 22 guntas in sy. no.191/3a situated at manjare village, chikodi taluk, belgaum district, was granted in favour of his father-venkaji kulkarni by the tahsildar of chikodi, under section 4(1) of bombay paragena and kulkarni watans (abolition) act, 1950. again, as per re-grant order no.rb/wrg/sr.461 dated 2.3.1958, the land in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 2012 (HC)

Smt. Sundrabai and Others Vs. Deputy Commissioner and Others

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Apr-16-2012

venugopala gowda, j1. petitioners are the wife and children of one arjuna nagendrasa kathare, who purchased the land bearing sy.nos.789/16 and 786/6 of ranebennur village from hanumantappa basappa basenayakar and huchchappa tai hanumavva basenayakar, under a registered sale deed dated 16.05.1968. mutation entry in respect of the said property was made in the name of arjunsa nagendrasa kathare on 15.05.1971 vide annexure-b.2. on 02.06.2007, 3rd respondent filed an appeal, under section 136(2) of the karnataka land revenue act, 1964 (for short the act), before the 2nd respondent, challenging the mutation entry no.7787 dated 15.05.1971 i.e., after about 35 years. the said appeal was allowed on 18.05.2009 vide order as at annexure-f petitioners, questioned the said order, by filing a revision petition under section 136(3) of the act, before the 1st respondent. the revision petition was dismissed by an order dated 11.11.2010, as at annexure-c. this writ petition is directed against the said orders.3. sri v.p.kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, firstly, contended that the 2nd respondent has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the title to the property and the order, as at annexure-f, is bad and illegal. secondly, the 1st respondent has failed to consider the revision petition in accordance with law and the order, as at annexure-c, is arbitrary and illegal. thirdly, the impugned orders are cryptic, passed without application of mind and consideration of the matters .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 2012 (HC)

Thirakanagouda N. Patil, Since Deceased by His Lrs. and Others Vs. Sta ...

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Nov-06-2012

1. this intra court appeal is preferred by the petitioners in w.p.no.16859/2011 aggrieved by the order dated 29.05.2012 of the learned single judge dismissing the petition. 2. facts not in dispute are: one naganagouda patil, said to be the propositus, had eight children, since deceased represented by legal heirs, petitioners and respondents were parties in o.s.no.182/1966 on the file of the munsiff, haveri, for declaration, partition and separate possession of several immovable properties including lands in r.s.no.195 and 129/a measuring 20 acres and 31 guntas and 1 acre and 29 guntas, respectively, of balambid village in hangal taluk, admittedly, claimed to be in joint possession and cultivation of the siblings, as tenants. in the absence of a dispute lover tenancy claims, an issue over claim of tenancy was not framed and the suit ended in a 13 compromise decree dated 29.09.1966, annexure-r-3 to the statement of objections of respondents, one of the terms of which reads thus: ??kannadam ? 3. by this term, the parties agreed that the lands in question since tenanted from the time of their ancestors, and if the property is shown as fallen to the share of one of the parties no disputes would arise, the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 7 to cultivate the lands jointly and as has 14 been done till the present to jointly pay to the landlord the rent (lavani) 4. the deputy commissioner having initiated action to recover the levy over paddy grown on the said lands, under the food .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 2012 (HC)

Omanna Since Deceased by His Lrs and Others Vs. Sushibai and Others

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Aug-09-2012

(prayer: this rfa is filed under section 96 of cpc against the judgment and decree dated 4.4.2000 passed in o.s no.35/88 by the 1st addl. civil judge, sr.dn. belgaum, decreeing the suit for declaration and possession and dismissing the suit for permanent injunction.) 1. this is a defendants' appeal against the judgment and decree dated 4th april 2000 passed in o.s.no.35/1988 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff granting relief of declaration as well as possession in respect of 18 guntas of the suit schedule land from defendant nos.25 to 35 and declining to grant decree of permanent injunction. 2. for the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit. 3. the pedigree of the family is clearly set out in schedule 'a' annexed to the plaint which is not in dispute. 4. the land bearing r.s.no.1389 originally measured 23 acres 36 guntas. it was owned by one thakkoji. thakkoji had five sons by name omanna, narayan, parashram, neelu and meenaji. none were alive at the time of filing of the suit. the case of the plaintiffs is, during the lifetime of thakkoji, he executed a registered will with respect to entire r.s.no.1389 situated in kangrali village of belgaum taluk. under the said will, r.s.no.1389 was bequeated in favour of meenaji, his last son. this will was executed when his sons were alive. meenaji son of tukkoji died in about 1926. at the time when the will was executed on 10.11.1890, r.s.no.1389 was not sub-divided. on 27.01. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 2012 (HC)

Late Veerabhadrayya Chandrashekharayya Kadadevaramath Since Deceased b ...

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Aug-23-2012

(prayer: this rsa is filed under section 100 of cpc against the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2009 passed in r.a no.229/2002 on the file of the i addl. civil judge (sr.dn.), hubli allowing the appeal, filed against the judgment and decree dated 9.8.2002 passed in o.s no.272/1995 on the file of the prl. civil judge (jr.dn.) hubli, dismissing the suit filed for declaration and possessions and mense profit.) 1. this is the defendants' second appeal against the judgment and decree of the first appellate court by which it set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court and decreed the suit of the plaintiff as prayed for. 2. for the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit. 3. the plaintiff sri siddeshwar is the adopted son of kadayya. the subject matter of the suit is property bearing c.t.s. no. 2890, c.w. ward no. 2, hubli, dharwad district, consisting of a house a open space which is surrounded by the properties which are more particularly described in item no. 1 of the plaint and for short hereinafter referred to as the suit property. 4. the case of the plaintiff is the suit property originally belonged to his adopted father kadayya channabasaiah kadadevaramath. it was under his management. after his death the name of his wife smt. gurubasavva was entered in the city survey records. after the death of smt. gurubasavva the plaintiff has become the absolute owner of the suit property. the defendants are his near .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 16 2012 (HC)

Sangappa Ramappa Jampur Vs. Honnappa and Others

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Feb-16-2012

(prayer: rfa filed u/s 96 of cpc against the judgment and decree dt.2.11.2006 passed in o.s.no.42/1998 on the file of the civil judge (sr.dn.) and prl.jmfc., ranebennur. partly decreeing the suit for partition and separate possession.) d.v. shylendra kumar, j. 1. plaintiff in o.s.no.42/1998 on the file of the court of civil judge (sr.dn.), prl. jmfc at ranebennur is the appellant u/s 96 of the code of civil procedure. 2. suit was one for partition of the joint family properties impleading the elder brother 0.of the plaintiff as the 1st defendant; elder sister of the plaintiff as the 2nd defendant, daughter of the 2nd defendant as the 3rd defendant and the step mother of the plaintiff as the 4th defendant plaintiff had claimed half share in the suit schedule properties and it is not in dispute that suit items 1a1 and 1a2, the two parcels of agricultural land abutting one another had been purchased in the name of the 1st defendant. the first purchase was on 02.05.1945 when the 1st defendant was a minor and the mother of the 1st defendant acting as guardian of the minor and the second purchase was on 28.05.1969 when the 1st defendant had attained majority by that time. 3. in respect of suit schedule 1d item, the plaintiff pleaded the though the khatha in the revenue records in respect of this land stood in the name of the 3rd defendant, it is also a joint family property having been purchased by the father of the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 in the name of his second wife i. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 2012 (HC)

Prashant Vs. State of Karnataka and Another

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Jul-18-2012

anand byrareddy, j 1. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned government pleader. 2. the present petition is filed by the husband of the second respondent. 3. the facts leading up to this case are as follows: it is alleged by the shahapur police, belgaum that the petitioner had committed offences punishable under sections 498a, 504 and 307 of the indian penal code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ??ipc for brevity) and a case was registered in crime no.61/2011 by the jurisdictional police station and accordingly a complaint was registered before the jmfc iii court, belgaum. the petitioner was promptly arrested and produced before the court on 25.5.2011 and was remanded to judicial custody. this was in the backdrop of one ravi, son of suryakant shete of belgaum having lodged a complaint that his sister, namely, usha, the second respondent was given in marriage to the petitioner about six years prior to the complaint and it was a love marriage between the petitioner and the second respondent and the elders in the respective families had agreed to the marriage. a male child was born to the couple about four and half years prior to the complaint. it is alleged that the petitioner thereafter started ill-treating the second respondent on account of a discord having developed between them and he was alleged to be flirting with other women and therefore, there was rancour between the petitioner and the second respondent. it was alleged that on 25.5.2011, a .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //