Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: karnataka dharwad Year: 2014 Page 1 of about 7 results (0.014 seconds)

Jun 06 2014 (HC)

Siddalingappa and Others Vs. E. Anjinappa and Others

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Jun-06-2014

(prayer: this appeal is filed u/s 100 of cpc against the judgment and decree dated 30.07.2010 passed in r.a. no.16/2009 on the file of the civil judge (sr. dn.) at kudligi allowing the appeal filed against the judgment dated 13.03.2009 and the decree passed in o.s. no. 191/2002 on the file of the civil judge (jr. dn.) and jmfc at kudligi, decreeing the suit filed for declaration and injunction and etc.) 1. defendants 1 to 4 of an original suit bearing o.s.no.191/2002 which was pending on the file of the court of civil judge (jr.dn.) and jmfc, kudligi, bellary district, are before this court challenging the judgment and decree passed against them in r.a.no.16/2009 which was pending on the file of the court of civil judge (sr.dn.), kudligi. first respondent herein is the only plaintiff in the said suit. the remaining respondents are defendants 5 to 9 in the said suit. parties will be referred to as plaintiff and defendants 1 to 9 as per their ranking given in the trial court. 2. suit filed for the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction was contested by the defendants and was decreed in part granting limited injunction against unlawful dispossession only vide considered judgment dated 13.03.2009. against the said limited injunction granted in favour of the plaintiff, a regular appeal was filed by the very plaintiff under section 96 before the first appellate court i.e., the court of civil judge (sr.dn.), kudligi, in r.a.no.16/2009. the said appeal had been filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 2014 (HC)

Shankarbhatt S/0 Mart and Abhatt Pujar, and State of Karnataka and Oth ...

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Feb-03-2014

this r.f.a is filed under section 96 of cpc against the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2006 passed in o.s. no. 112/2001 on the file of the i addl. senior civil judge at bagalkot, dismissing the suit filed for declaration and permanent injunction and etc. this appeal coming for final hearing on this day, court delivered the following:- 1. this is an appeal filed by the plaintiff of o.s. no. 112/2001 under section 96 challenging the judgment and decree passed on 24.08.2006 by the learned first additional senior civil judge, eadami. suit of the plaintiffs for the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction has been dismissed by considered judgment dated 24.08.2006. respondents herein are the defendant nos.l to 7 in the trial court. parties will be referred to as the plaintiff and defendants as per their ranking given in the trial court. 2. property over which the main relief of declaration of title has been sought by the plaintiff is an agricultural land measuring 3.08 acres in sy. no. 161 of cholachagudd village of badami taluk, bagalkot district. according to the plaintiff, property in question is stated to be the ancestral property of plaintiff and defendant nos.2 to 7 and is situated in the vicinity of banashankari temple of cholachagudd village of badami taluk. every year a fair will be held during the period 'yellu amavasya". normally jatra will be held during january or february according to the english calendar. according to the plaintiff though the property .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 04 2014 (HC)

K. Mallikarjun Vs. The Revenue Inspector and Another

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Jun-04-2014

(prayer: this writ petition is filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india praying to quash the impugned rejection order/ endorsement dated 20.09.2011 passed by the r1/ the revenue inspector, moka hobli, bellary vide annexure-b and etc.,) 1. in this writ petition under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india, the petitioner has called in question the order dated 20.09.2011 passed by the first respondent vide annexure-b. 2. by the impugned order at annexure-b, the first respondent has rejected the request of the petitioner to effect mutation in respect of the land bearing sy.no.273/c3 measuring 02 acres 10 cents of byradevanahalli village. 3. aggrieved by that the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 4. briefly stated the facts are: the petitioner claims that he is the owner of the land bearing sy.no.273/c3 measuring 02 acres 10 cents of byradevanahalli village. the petitioner purchased the said land from one nayakar maranna through registered sale deed dated 13.07.2011 while purchasing the said land the petitioner made enquiry regarding the source of the title of his vendor. the petitioner was told that the land was granted under the karnataka land reforms act on 19.10.1982 and it is not a granted land under the provisions of the karnataka schedule castes/schedule tribes (prohibition of transfer certain lands) act, 1978. it is stated that the period of ten years has been expired. thereafter, the petitioner has purchased the said land. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 03 2014 (HC)

Rama and Others Vs. Mastamma and Others

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Jun-03-2014

(prayer: this r.s.a. is filed u/s 100 of cpc against the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2010 passed in r.a. no.17/2009 on the file of the senior civil judge, honavar (itinerary court at bhatkal) dismissing the appeal filed against the judgment dated 28.02.2009 and the decree passed in o.s. no. 93/2005 on the file of the principal civil judge (jr. dn.) and jmfc at bhatkal decreeing the suit filed for partition and permanent injunction.) 1. the defendants of an original suit bearing o.s. no. 93/2005 which was pending on the file of court of civil judge (sr. dn.) and jmfc, bhatkal of uttara kannada district are before this court challenging the judgment and decree passed against them on 28.02.2009 and the affirmation of the same in r.a. no. 17/2009 which was pending on the file of court of senior civil judge, honnavar iternating at bhatkal. 2. suit filed for the relief of partition and separate possession by smt. mastamma wife of subbayya naik, first respondent herein as plaintiff has been decreed as prayed for granting half share in the suit schedule property. the same has been confirmed in the appeal filed u/s 96 of c.p.c. in r.a. no. 17/2009. one person by name irappa naik had three daughters by name durgamma, madevi @ kombi, mastemma (plaintiff). the said erappa had a younger brother by name mastappa. according to the plaintiff, erappa and mastappa were residing as members of the joint family and were cultivating the schedule property as tenant. consequent upon the death of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 2014 (HC)

Hanamanth Shingadeppa Gadded and Another Vs. Rudrappa Krishnappa Gadde ...

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Mar-03-2014

(prayer: rsa filed u/s. 100 of cpc against the judgement % decree dtd:23/7/2009 passed in r.a.no: 145/2008 on the file of the fast track court, .jamakhandi, dismissing the appeal, filed against the judgement and decree dtd: 3/4/2008 passed in o.sino:324/2004 on the file of the adl. civil judge (sr.dn), jamakhandi, dismissing the suit filed for partition and injunction.) 1. the present appeal is filed under section 100 of cpc challenging the concurrent findings of the trial court bearing o.s.324/2004 pending on the file of addl. civil judge, (sr.dn.) jamkhandi, sitting at mudhol and confirmation of the same by the district and sessions judge, fast track court, jamkhandi in r.a. 145/2008. 2. the said suit had been filed for relief of partition and separate possession in respect of land measuring 14.27 acres in survey no. 126. the appellants herein were plaintiffs and respondents were defendants in the suit. 3. according to the plaintiffs, one huliya was the propositus and he had two sons namely krishnappa and singadeppa. krishnappa had one son namely rudrappa, who is defendant no.1 and singadeppa had five sons, who are plaintiffs and defendant nos.2 to 4. the land in sy.no.126 of lokapur village originally measuring 14.27 acres was an ancestral property of the family of the plaintiffs and defendants. after the death of propositus huliya, the mutation was effected in the name of his son krishnappa. after the death of krishnappa, mutation was done in the name of defendant no. 1- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 2014 (HC)

The Executive Engineer, O and M Division-2, (Electrical) and Others Vs ...

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Jun-13-2014

(prayer: this appeal is filed under section 100 of c.p.c. against the judgment and decree dated 22.02.2011 passed in r.a. no.52/2010 on the file of the prl. senior civil judge at ranebennur, dismissing the appeal, filed against the judgment dated 23.04.2010 and the decree passed ino.s. no.11/2010 on the file of the addl. civil judge and ii addl. jmfc., ranebennur, decreeing the suit filed for recovery of compensation.) 1. this is an appeal filed by the defendants of an original suit bearing o.s. no.11/2010, under section 100 of c.p.c. challenging the judgment passed against them for recovery of compensation in regard to the death of one basavaraj due to electrocution. respondents herein are the plaintiffs no.1 to 3 in the said suit. parties will be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants as per their ranking given in the trial court. 2. suit filed for the relief of recovery of compensation in regard to the death due to electrocution of basavaraj was decreed on 23.04.2010 granting compensation of rs.4,00,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum. against the said considered judgment and decree, a regular appeal was filed by the defendants before the court of prl. senior civil judge at ranebennur in r.a. no.52/2010. the said appeal has been dismissed by a considered judgment dated 22.02.2011. but while dismissing the said appeal, learned judge of the first appellate court has enhanced the compensation from rs.4,00,000/- as awarded by the trial court to rs.6,16,000/- with interest to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 2014 (HC)

Prabhakar and Others Vs. K. Manjunath Irkal and Others

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Decided on : Mar-19-2014

(prayer: this criminal petition is filed under section 482 of code of criminal procedure, praying to allow this petition and quash the order dated 27.11.2013 passed in c.c. no. 285v 2013 by the learned prl. civil judge and j.m.f.c., hubli thereby taking cognizance for the offences punishable under sections 120(b), 204, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 of i.p.c. as against the petitioners who are accused nos.5 and 6 are concerned.) (prayer: this criminal petition is filed under section 482 of code of criminal procedure, praying to allow this petition and quash the order dated 27.11.2013 passed in c.c. no. 28^4/2013 by the learned prl. civil judge and j.m.f.c., hubli thereby taking cognizance for the offences punishable under sections 120(b), 204, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 of i.p.c. as against the petitioners who are accused nos.1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 are concerned.) 1. the petitioners in crl.p. no.8207/2013 were arrayed as accused nos. 1 to 4 and 7 respectively wherein the petitioners in crl.p. no, 100106/2014 are arrayed as accused nos.5 and 6 in c.c. no.2854/2013 on the file of the jmfc ii court at hubli. the petitioners ha^e sought for quashing of the entire proceedings in the said c.c. no.2854/2013 wherein the learned magistrate has taken cognizance against them for the offences under sections 120(b), 204, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 of i.p.c. 2. the brief factual matrix which are undisputed between the parties are that, the respondent no.1 herein is the person who has taken loan from .....

Tag this Judgment!


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