Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar celebrates his 55th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar: Born on 20.07.1970. Did B.Com., LL.M. (Karnataka University, Dharwad). Enrolled as an Advocate on 24th June, 1994. Started practicing in Dharwad District Court in the chambers of his father- Mr. B.M. Amarannavar. Worked as Special Public Prosecutor, Fast Track Court, Dharwad. Worked as part-time faculty member in University College of Law, Dharwad. Directly appointed as District and Sessions Judge on 25th February 2008 and served as Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot and Udupi. Served as Registrar (Vigilance), High Court of Karnataka and also served as Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Appointed as an Additional Judge of High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru on 04-05-2020 and Permanent Judge on 25.09.2021.
Important Judgments delivered by Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar.
Cr.P.C. Section 41A. When police issues notice under Section 41A, the apprehension of arrest is not completely ruled out. Hence petition for anticipatory bail is maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Service law. A public servant cannot be left without a post. Transfer of a public servant without him being posted elsewhere amounts to a legal malafide. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
Suit for partition by daughters based on the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act. Properties sold prior to 20 December 2004 are not available for partition. Karnataka High Court.
Plea of adverse possession in the written statement and the plea of ownership based on grant in the oral evidence run contrary to each other thus disproving both the claims. Karnataka High Court.
Proof of Will. When the attestor of a Will turns/declared hostile, other evidence showing proper execution of the Will can be relied upon. Karnataka High Court.
Principle of Feeding the Grant by Estoppel would enure to the benefit of purchasers of Inam lands upon the re-grant under the Karnataka (Religious and Charitable) Inam Abolition Act, 1955. Karnataka High Court.
Adoption of child precedes proper ceremonies being performed. Mere adoption deed without proof of required ceremonies does not prove adoption. Karnataka High Court.
In cases of cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, courts must impose a fine that is both punitive and compensatory, ensuring the complainant receives not only the cheque amount but also reasonable interest (typically 9% per annum) to account for the delay and loss incurred due to the commercial transaction and protracted litigation. Appellate courts should not reduce this fine without proper justification, especially when the trial court has already considered the statutory interest and the time consumed in the legal process. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Complaint under Section 138 before the expiry of the 15 day notice period is premature and not maintainable. However, the complainant can file a fresh complaint, and the delay in doing so can be condoned if the complaint is filed at the earliest. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. If the payee is a proprietary concern, the proprietor can file complaint while describing as a sole proprietor of proprietary concern. Karnataka High Court.
If the legal notice is not issued within 30 days from the date of receiving the dishonour intimation excluding the first day, the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Return of the cheque with endorsement ‘’Bank under liquidation as per the order of the Reserve Bank of India’’ does not attract the provisions of Section 138. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. The initiation of suo moto proceedings for resumption within five years from the date of commencement of the Act cannot be considered illegal or vitiated by delay. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. When occupancy rights are granted ‘exclusively’ to one person, other family members cannot file a suit for partition without challenging the order of the Tribunal. Karnataka High Court.
Mere utterance of the words ‘’go and die’’ does not attract Section 306 of IPC. Words uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation to commit suicide. Karnataka High Court.
Section 319 Cr.P.C. Summoned person need not be given an opportunity of being heard before being added as an accused to face the trial. Karnataka High Court.
Industrial Disputes Act. Mere non-approval of dismissal order in terms of Section 33(2)(b) does not give right to the workman to file an application for recovery of arrears of wages under Section 33C(2). Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 138. When proprietary concern is the payee of the cheque, it is not necessary to make proprietor also party to the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Complainant who settles matter before the Lok Adalat can execute the settlement as a decree before a Civil Court or proceed under Section 431, Cr.P.C depending on the terms of the compromise. Karnataka High Court.
Person who is charged for an offence under Section 307 of IPC can be convicted for the offence under Sections 324 or 325 of IPC as the case may be if the ingredients of the said offence are attracted. Karnataka High Court.
Police cannot receive a report and register a case under the provision of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act. Only the Magistrate can take cognizance of the offences. Karnataka High Court.
FIRs/Investigations cannot be transferred by invoking powers under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. Only pending cases and appeals can be transferred under the Section. Karnataka High Court.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Order of granting maintenance does not amount to ‘protection order’ and violation of the same will not attract the penal provisions of Section 31. Karnataka High Court.
When a registered sale deed is sought to be avoided on the ground of fraud, simple suit for injunction without declaration is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Though criminal prosecution is permissible against defamatory statement in civil suit, if the statement is made in good faith and necessary for the disposal of the case, criminal prosecution cannot be allowed to continue. Karnataka High Court.
While granting permission to the Police to investigate non-cognizable offence, the Magistrate cannot simply issue police intimation without passing any order on the requisition. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Municipalities Act. When action of the Municipality is not traceable to the provisions of the Act, prior notice under Section 284(1) of the Act is not necessary to institute a civil suit. Karnataka High Court.
Wakf Act. Court cannot take cognizance for the offence under Section 52-A based on Police report. Karnataka High Court.
Abetment to commit suicide. Offending action ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence to constitute the offence under Section 306 IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Lender repeatedly demanding return of the borrowed loan from the borrower and uttering abusive words will not constitute abetment to commit suicide. Karnataka High Court.
Transferor cannot prejudice the rights of the transferee by subsequent dealing with the property. If there are successive transfers of the same property, the later transfer is subject to the prior transfer. Karnataka High Court.
Daksha Legal 