Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar celebrates his 60th birthday today.
Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar enrolled as an advocate on 11.02.1987 and practiced independently at Chikkaballapur, City Civil Court and High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore on Civil side.
He was directly appointed as District and Sessions Judge on 27th May, 2002 and served as Additional Districts and Sessions Judge at Tumkuru; and City Civil Court, Bangalore and Principal District and Sessions Judge at Bidar, Chitradurga, Bangalore Rural Districts.
He also served as Director Karnataka Judicial Academy, Bengaluru.
Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar was appointed as an Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 14.11.2016 and Permanent Judge on 03.11.2018.
Important judgments delivered by Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar.
Public Trust. Decision on application under section 92 CPC shall be taken by looking into only the plaint averments. Application can be opposed only with reference to plaint averments only. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/UCEQ7YmlB4HlEReX0r7fq0pK5
Civil Procedure Code. Order granting leave under section 92 in respect of public trust is a judicial order and can be questioned by revision petition under section 115.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/yzVpyl6PXJAhqgYU4rV78bi5A
Attachment before judgment in a suit for damages for defamation cannot be passed since the claim for damages is not an ascertained sum arising from a transaction between the parties. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/JYFVrsvVCBLUP808IlrLZa2T7
Attachment before judgment. The plaintiff must be able to demonstrate that on the day when the suit was filed, the defendant owed to him in a certain sum of money on account of a transaction between them. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/iNwfIo0FHGE3ky8FzNKZgXnWh
Caveat cannot curtail Court’s power to pass interim orders when party approaching court makes out an extraordinary circumstance in the presence of caveator. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/eKzc6oWv0mjYWQSpSnP8HzGT7
Filing of Caveat cannot curtail Court’s power to pass interim orders when party approaching court makes out an extraordinary circumstance in the presence of caveator. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/DmP6WrUjR3MUHWO01yw2PFFbz
Executing Court can order arrest of the judgement debtor on oral application of the decree holder, without issuing arrest notice, only if the judgement debtor is within the precincts of the Court. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/CeBxHJwRlYcJTqE4PcxQeoROv
Court cannot place accused exparte in cheque bounce cases and proceed with the trial. Court must secure presence of the accused if he does not appear despite service of summons. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/uDR1b4mRA4vZklQQt1YFB5Y0M
MVC Case. Split multiplier. Higher multiplier for the salary component and lower multiplier for the pension component is justified when the person had no future prospect of re-employment. Karnataka High Court explains. (DB)
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/rF9w2HacF7tOstqC4XzSmHFCN
Dowry death. Failure to explain reasons within the knowledge of the accused, under Section 313 Cr.P.C, renders the defence of the accused unreliable. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/YXiqmTlVtPW1wVYd94d1ubxI7
When temporary injunction sought in an appeal preferred against decree, the appellate court can look into the evidence and findings of the trial court to form an opinion regarding the nature or status of the property. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/w4ThkSrxNE4DwSQrqzxVjvlBQ
Cheque issued towards refund of failed marriage expenses constitutes enforceable debt under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the same is not hit by Section 23 of the Contract Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/o8iClgW00pJKJGjn4DIZK926x
Default imprisonment for non-payment of fine is a penalty and not a sentence. The default sentence cannot be for a period more than one fourth of maximum imprisonment period that can be imposed as sentence. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/90KbsnOJp2ADsr0XOrrlKIgdE
Cheque bounce case. Single complaint in respect of several cheques issued from Company account as well as personal account is maintainable if the transaction is same. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/dNCPL15SjH5pR7a4w8Lc6uUlr
Cheque bounce case. Unless accused introduces a specific defence questioning financial capacity of complainant, Court cannot go into this question on its own and give a finding. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/O9HMqO2wIJGCtnqIpWNYPa53h
Every seasoned advocate trains the witnesses before they are examined in the court. Such training cannot be branded as ‘tutoring the witness’. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/BeDHhtClpXCo7L1sFgql1coz6
SARFAESI Act. Whether action can be taken in relation to security interest created in an agricultural property can also be dealt with by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Writ petition cannot be entertained on this ground alone. Karnataka High Court.(DB)
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fEy5S0lOame5iJnrKATE0TvAB
If search and seizure effected pursuant to a FIR disclose a different distinct offence, there is no bar for registration of a second FIR even though the first FIR is quashed by the Court. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/dAxQIBxxCMKrPtp8yAL034R4p
If trial court declines to frame or reframe issue despite request made by a party during pendency of suit, the same can be agitated in appeal against the final judgment. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/lH7jYBhmYGl3TWI7ZWsfepBku
Omission to put question to accused under section 313 Cr.P.C, cannot be a good ground to upset conviction unless it has resulted in miscarriage of justice or prejudiced the interest of the accused substantially. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Os1BAPTK7UMdal6qiWPq2AQfj
There is no bar for the informant police officer to undertake investigation so long as the investigation is free of bias and prejudice. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/V77topspSyDs99Xw0hAaHSvNs
First of its kind; Karnataka High Court grants ‘John Doe’ injunction order against unknown defendant/respondent.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/vFrxsGzw3ADALVVqy1J817iiD
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Amended Section 19 is retrospective in operation and previous sanction for prosecution of retired public servant necessary even prior to the amendment. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/XsnVYVIDLEHNcAEs6HL4Ei0Kd
Registered sale deed or release deed do not require attestation and it is not necessary to examine attesting witnesses unless the execution of the document is specifically denied by its executor. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/UtI6TUqSRlxiXrfSnULaM64Zw
Election petition. Defeated candidate securing zero vote in a booth does not give rise to assumption of bogus voting. Suspicion does not take the place of evidence. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/imYx1GHhjOSMFzfqotJdZkF7E
Match fixing does not amount to cheating under Section 420 Indian Penal Code though it may indicate dishonesty, indiscipline and mental corruption of a player. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/XJEIjJ6aCmTaGvMT948iBkJjh
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Obtaining false caste certificate by non SC/ST person can not be construed as an offence under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/KXB2N3HsjwH8hIcy9IMlh5OCb
”Article 25 of the Constitution cannot be understood as affording protection to those who indulge in conversion under the camouflage of propagation of his or her religion”. Karnataka High Court while quashing criminal proceedings against police officers.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/SctbBAUvVYw1CSMxMVcZ2b8dU
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Section 8. Non-signatory defendants cannot be exposed to arbitral proceedings especially when the cause of action against all the defendants is same and cannot be bifurcated. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/rx83qVA7XsStuXAv3JFBekPah
Hindu Succession Act. Section 14. Life interest created to wife under Will beyond her share in a notional partition is not a pre-existing right. Bequeath is only life interest. Wife will not get absolute right. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/s3By08wWSkDhYnWeNIZ9jzX0K
Limitation Act. Article 65-b. Recovery of possession when mortgagee sells the property mortgaged. The Article does NOT apply when the property is sold under a statute. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/a0si6Vak9Zptt4JfkzJ6gWFKB
Transfer of Property Act. Section 43. Feeding the grant by estoppel does NOT apply if the transferee knows that the transferor did not possess the title at the time of transfer. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/8dPDjhgy7Fbr11zfO0LdC7J46
Prosecution for dishonour of cheque issued towards time barred debt is permissible when cheque was issued under a subsequent written agreement between the parties. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fjHyJBCNCuyfvj24ZFWHCJxn8
Inclusion of properties already partitioned in a suit for partition amounts to vexatious and scandalous litigation. Court can order deleting the properties from the plaint under Order 6 Rule 16 of CPC. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/oarJCd8AcDey37g4CGwf297ze
Partition Act. Party who applies for sale of the property under Section 2 cannot opt for purchase of the share of the other parties under Section 3. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/AyJ2wImDu5VSceufc4MgIGEqY
Daksha Legal 