Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-21-2003
Reported in : 2003CriLJ4766; ILR2003KAR3734
orderrajendra prasad, j.1. this criminal revision petition by the accused filed under section 397 read with 401 cr.p.c. is directed against the judgment dated 23.1.2002 passed in crl.a.no. 95/2000 on the file of the ii addl. sessions judge, dakshina kannada, mangalore, wherein the learned sessions judge had dismissed the appeal preferred by the accused under section 374 cr.p.c., challenging the legality and validity of the judgment dated 24.3.2000 passed in c.c.no. 6033/1999 on the file of the j.m.f.c. ill court, mangalore, wherein the learned magistrate had recorded a finding of conviction of the accused-revision petitioner for the offences under section 448 and 354 of i.p.c. and awarded the sentence as detailed in the judgment, challenging the legality and propriety of the judgments impugned.2. the court has heard the arguments of both sides on merits.3. sri appa rao, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, strenuously contended that the material on record clearly shows that the judgment of the appellate court is illegal and invalid as the learned sessions judge had not at all reappreciated the evidence on record and has merely narrated the evidence on record placed by the prosecution and had recorded his conclusions. hence, the learned counsel prayed for remanding the case to the learned sessions judge for rehearing the same.4. on the contrary, sri p.m. nawaz, learned government pleader, strenuously contended that the material on record clearly shows that the learned .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-04-2003
Reported in : I(2004)DMC753; ILR2003KAR4076
sreedhar rao, j.1. this petition is filed for quashing of the proceedings in p.c. no. 38/02 on the file of c j m bellary. the petitioners are the accused. the respondent filed a private complaint under section 200 cr .c alleging commission of offence punishable under section 494, 494a and 3,4 and 6 of the dowry prohibition act. the magistrate referred the complaint for investigation under section 156(3) of cr p.c. and after registration of the case in crime no. 191/02 the accused were arrested . the said proceedings are challenged as illegal and seek quashing of the same. 2. the facts reveal that except the offence punishable under section 494 ipc rest of the offences are cognizable and could be investigated by the police for launching the prosecution. the provisions of section 198 of cr p.c. mandates that the court shall not take cognizance of offences relating to chapter xx of the indian penal code except upon a complaint by the aggrieved persons or the relatives with the leave of the court under special envisaged circumstances. section 494 ipc is one of the offences contemplated under section 200 of cr p.c. the word 'complaint' is defined under section 2(d) to mean any allegation made orally or in writing to a magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this code, that some person, whether known or unknown, has committed an offence, but does not include a police report. in that view, an offence under section 494 ipc has to be prosecuted by the private complainant by .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-10-2003
Reported in : ILR2004KAR586; 2004(2)KarLJ285
bannurmath, j.1. this appeal is filed challenging the judgment of conviction dated 29th june 2001 passed by the learned sessions judge, koppal, in session case no. 59/2000 finding the accused/appellant guilty of the offences punishable under sections 302 and 203 ipc., and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of rs. 100/- for the offence under section 302 ipc., and simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under section 203 ipc.the brief facts as per the prosecution case are as follows: -2. the accused balappa was the husband of deceased devamma, who was the daughter of mahadevappa p.w.1. it is not in dispute that both mahadevappa on one hand and the deceased on the other were staying in kustagi though in different houses at a short distanceof a furlong or so. according to the prosecution the accused was of suspicious mind and was infact suspecting the fidelity of his wife.1473651493022013. during the investigation, p.w. 13 has recorded the statements of various witnesses including p.ws. 1 and 2 who have seen the accused last time with the deceased when alive. it appears during theinterrogation, the accused made a voluntary statement and on the basis of which the murder weapon - axe - m.o.6, blood stained shirt - m.o. 1 and dhoti - m.o.2 of accused have been discovered, the same have been seized under mahazars, the body is subjected to autopsy and the clothes are sent to the forensic science laboratory. on receipt of the necessary reports and on .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-17-2003
Reported in : 2004ACJ1289
tirath s. thakur, j.1. this miscellaneous first appeal is directed against a judgment and award made by motor accidents claims tribunal, bangalore rural district, bangalore, whereby m.v.c. no. 936 of 1997 has been allowed in part and a sum of rs. 50,000 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum awarded as compensation for the death of late arun kumar in a road accident.2. the deceased arun kumar was on 8.7.1997 riding a scooter on his way from maddur to malavalli. when he reached a place near the sugarcane mill owned by one malleshanna situated on the said road, he met with an accident resulting in his death. a claim petition in m.v.c. no. 936 of 1997 was presented by the parents of the deceased for payment of compensation. according to the averments made in the said claim petition, the deceased was engaged as a driver by respondent no. 1, the owner of the scooter involved in the accident and the accident in question had taken place while the deceased was trying to avoid a cyclist who had suddenly emerged on the road. the claim petition specifically stated that claimants were exercising their right of filing a claim before the motor accidents claims tribunal instead of one under workmen's compensation act, 1923 and that the claim was in terms of section 163-a of the motor vehicles act, 1988 on 'no fault basis' only. objections filed on behalf of the owner of the scooter involved in the accident, inter alia, stated that the deceased had been engaged by respondent owner .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-16-2003
Reported in : AIR2003Kant428; ILR2003KAR2420; 2004(2)KarLJ126
srinivasa reddy, j 1. in this appeal the appellants-plaintiffs call in question the judgment and decree of the court-below allowing the appeal and remanding the matter back to the trial court with a direction to allow the parties to lead further evidence and to dispose of the case afresh.2. the plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the defendant has no right whatsoever in an area measuring 0.4.0 of sy.no. 113 of shedageri village and for consequential relief of mandatory injunction. the plaintiff also gave the boundaries of the area in respect of which the suit was filed. the plaintiff claimed that the suit land was granted to them on 19.1.1972 under a kabulayat executed by him in favour of the government and possession was handed over to him on 21.1.1972 and mutation entry no. 3023 has also been effected in that regard. the plaintiff further averred that on 1.10.1973 the survey of the land was conducted and in the month of december, 1972 an area of 0-2-5 in sy. no. 113 and 114 a was granted to the defendant and in respect of the said grant in favour of the defendant the mutation entry 3102 has been effected. taking advantage of the absence of the plaintiff the defendant trespassed over the suit land and has put up some construction over part of the suit land. on the basis of these averments the plaintiff sought for the decree of declaration and prohibitive injunction.3. the defendant resisted the suit by filing the written statement to the effect that the plaintiff .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-16-2003
Reported in : ILR2003KAR2667; 2003(6)KarLJ30; (2004)IILLJ83Kant
orderdattu, j.1. an employee officer of the respondent syndicate bank is before this court, interalia requesting this court to quash the orders made by the respondent bank dated 17.12.1999, 30.12.1999 and 1.1.2000 respectively. 2. facts in nutshell are petitioner had joined the services of the respondent bank on 16.7.1970 as a clerk. while in service, he was initially promoted as an officer in junior management grade scale-i w.e.f. 25.5.1974. he was further promoted as an officer in middle management grade scale ii w.e.f. 1.1.1982 and then to the middle management grade scale iii w.e.f. 1.10.1990. he was further promoted as a senior management grade scale iv officer w.e.f. 16.5.1998. 3. on promotion to grade scale iv officer, he was transferred to hampanakatta, mangalore branch of the respondent bank as its chief manager. he reported for duty at hampanakatta, mangalore branch on 3.6.1988. while he was working as chief manager at the aforesaid branch, he was transferred to ludhiana branch of the respondent bank by their official memorandum dated 24.11.1999. 4. for the reasons mentioned in the notice of voluntary retirement dated 14.12.1999, petitioner requested the respondent bank to permit him to retire from service voluntarily w.e.f. 1.1.2000. the reason for such request is mentioned in the aforesaid notice for the purpose of disposal of this case, the said letter requires to be noticed. therefore, it is extracted and it reads as under. 'i intend to get relieved from the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Oct-17-2003
Reported in : 2004ACJ1091; 2003(6)KarLJ134
s.r. nayak, j.1. in a bodily injury case arising out of a motor vehicle accident, the injured being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 8-11-2000 passed in mvc no. 2834 of 1996 on the file of the motor accident claims tribunal and additional judge, court of small causes, bangalore city (sch-5), for short, 'the mact, has preferred this appeal under section 173(1) of the motor vehicles act, 1988, for short 'the act'.2. the facts of the case in brief are as follows:in an accident involving a motor-cycle bearing reg. no. mem-3769 owned by the 1st respondent and insured by the 2nd respondent-insurance company, the appellant sustained certain injuries. he was in-patient in the victoria hospital between 19-8-1996 to 23-8-1996 (both days inclusive) and even after discharge from the hospital, he had to undergo medical treatment for a period of three months. in the accident the claimant sustained bimalleolar fracture of the right ankle joint and when he was in-patient in the victoria hospital, he underwent surgery and pop cast. the appellant on the date of the accident was aged 47 years and he was a mechanic and according to him, he was earning monthly income of rs. 3,000/-. the claimant-appellant alleging that the accident took place solely on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the motor-cycle filed claim petition before the mact under section 166 of the act, claiming total compensation of rs. 4,00,000/-under various heads. although the owner of the motor- .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Oct-27-2003
Reported in : 120CompCas340(Kar); ILR2004KAR1656; 51SCL191(Kar)
n. kumar, j.1. the petitioner is a company incorporated under the laws of oman and having its designated office at post box no. 134, postal code 112, ruwi, sultanate of oman. the petitioner-company set up a branch office at bangalore vide licence no. (bg) no. 1797-98 elated march 16, 1998 issued by the reserve bank of india under section 22(1) of the banking regulation act, 1949 to carry on banking business in india. they have no other branches or establishments in india except at bangalore. the authorised share capital of the petitioner-company as on march, 2003, is 7,50,00,000 rial omani equivalent to 922 crores 50 lakhs of indian rupees. issued, subscribed and paid up capital is 4 crores 9 lakhs 37,480 rial omani equivalent to 603 crores 16 lakhs 10,040 indian rupees. the object of the petitioner-company is to carry on commercial and investment banking business, including the financing of trade and projects, etc. as set out in the memorandum of association. the petitioner-company is carrying on business through bangalore branch since 1998 which is situated at no. 29, infantry road, bangalore-1, which is the principal place of business of the petitioner-company in india. the company by name centurion bank limited which hereinafter referred to as a transferee company was incorporated on june 30, 1994, as public limited company under the provisions of the companies act, 1956, having its registered office at durga nivas, mahatma gandhi road, panaji-403001, goa. the transferee .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-06-2003
Reported in : II(2004)ACC811; 2004ACJ982
s.r. nayak, j.1. the appellant is the claimant-petitioner in m.v.c. no. 744 of 1996 on the file of the motor accidents claims tribunal, dakshina kannada at mangalore (for short, 'the tribunal') filed under section 166 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 (for short, 'the act'). in the said m.v.c., the appellant claimed total compensation of rs. 6,00,000 from the respondent for personal injuries suffered by him in an accident occurred on 27.2.1996 involving the motor vehicle of the respondent. the tribunal has awarded total compensation of rs. 59,190 with court costs and interest on the said amount at 6 per cent per annum from 17.6.1996 up to the date of payment. the appellant not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal has preferred this appeal under section 173(1) of the act.2. the facts of the case, in brief, are as under: appellant is a businessman carrying on business in the name and style, milton (india) pharmaceuticals, in balmata, mangalore. appellant was a very wealthy person and was regularly playing tennis. on 27.2.1996, after he played tennis at kadarigudda, mangalore, he was returning home on a kinetic honda scooter bearing no. ka 19-h 6124 from nanthoor towards kaikamba. when he reached scs petrol bunk at baikarnakatta, a lorry bearing no, ka 19-1230 owned by respondent no. 1, insured by the respondent no. 2 and driven by the respondent no. 3, came with high speed being driven in a most rash and negligent manner by the respondent no. 3 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-18-2003
Reported in : 2004ACJ1141
s.r. nayak, j.1. a minor male child who sustained certain grievous injuries in an accident that occurred on 8.5.2000 involving a motor vehicle bearing certificate of registration no. ka 25-2380 owned by the respondent no. 1 and insured by the respondent no. 2, resulting in amputation of the left leg below knee, represented by his father-guardian, has preferred this appeal calling in question the correctness and legality of the judgment and award dated 4.10.2001 passed in m.v.c. no. 1575 of 2000 on the file of the motor accidents claims tribunal (iii) and ii additional district judge, dharwad (for short 'the m.a.c.t.'), seeking more compensation.2. the fact that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the motor vehicle involved in the accident by its driver is not in controversy. therefore, there is no need for this court to review the finding recorded by the m.a.c.t. with regard to actionable negligence attributed to the driver of the offending vehicle.3. the learned counsel for the appellant while contending that the quantum of compensation awarded by the m.a.c.t. is unreasonable and inadequate would highlight that having regard to the fact that the left leg of the child had to be amputated below knee on account of the accident, m.a.c.t. is not justified in awarding only a sum of rs. 1,00,000/- for the future loss of income. learned counsel would also contend that the compensation awarded under other various heads is very much on a lower side. the .....Tag this Judgment!