Mohd. Laiquiddin v. Kamala Devi Misra, (2010) 2 SCC 407. Judgment Link: https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/35888.pdf Relevant paragraphs: 22. The sole issue raised by the respondents in this appeal, who are the appellants in Civil Appeals Nos. 4411-12 of 2002, is whether the finding of the courts below that the partnership firm stood dissolved on account of death …
Author Archives: rajdakshalegal
Karnataka High Court follows 1948 Privy Council judgment on boundary dispute. “The judgment has become Locus Classicus even after seven decades”. – HC
Dr. Jayasheela Venu and another vs A.J.F. D’Souza and others. Regular First Appeal 1225/2011 decided on 15 January 2021. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/358438/1/RFA1225-11-15-01-2021.pdf Locus Classicus = An authoritative passage from a standard work that is often quoted as an illustration. Appeal allowed. Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Civil Procedure Code. Transfer of case under Section 24. Though balance of convenience of the parties is a relevant consideration, in matrimonial matters, convenience of the wife is to be preferred. Karnataka High Court.
Shivangouda vs Savita. Civil Petition 200006/2019 decided on 4 January 2021. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/358444/1/CP200006-19-04-01-2021.pdf Relevant portion: It would be relevant to note that the basic principle governing the granting of a petition under Section 24 CPC is that the petition is not to be dealt with in a light hearted manner and transfer of a …
Bangalore and Mysore Turf Clubs. Staggering revenue loss to Government. Karnataka High Court expresses displeasure at the sad state of affairs.
Bangalore Turf Club Limited vs State Information Commissioner. Writ Petition 18449/2015 and connected matters decided on 13 January 2021. Justice P.B. Bajanthri. Judgment Link: https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/noticeBoard/WP18449.2015_16012021.pdf Relevant paragraphs: 28. In this context, it is necessary to reproduceextract of the KIC order dated 01.07.2013 (Sri Umapathi Svs PIO & The Secretary, BTC, (Para.10 and 11 ofW.P.18449/2015) “Firstly, land …
Bangalore Turf Club, Ladies Club, and The Institute of Engineer (India) are ‘public authority’ under the Right to Information Act 2005. Karnataka High Court.
Bangalore Turf Club Limited vs State Information Commissioner. Writ Petition 18449/2015 and connected matters decided on 13 January 2021. Judgment Link: https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/noticeBoard/WP18449.2015_16012021.pdf Relevant paragraphs: 2. In these petitions, contesting respondents –complainants filed applications seeking certain information fromthe respective petitioners. In not providing information soughtor in not taking any action on their application, contestingrespondents resorted to …
Delay tactics by defendant. Karnataka High Court rejects H.D. Devegowda’s petition to reopen the trial against him for defamation.
H.D.Devegowda vs M/s. Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise Limited. Writ Petition 725/2021 decided on 15 January 2021. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/358443/1/WP725-21-15-01-2021.pdf Relevant paragraphs: 2(a) The suit was filed by the respondent on 27.06.2012; it is founded on alleged defamation; plaintiff claims the damages in a sum of Rupees Ten Crore; Written Statement has been filed on 13.08.2012 …
Suits founded on the tort of defamation need to be tried expeditiously. Public memory being too short, the claim for redressal for the hurt of reputation merits speedier consideration. Karnataka High Court.
H.D.Devegowda vs M/s. Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise Limited. Writ Petition 725/2021 decided on 15 January 2021. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/358443/1/WP725-21-15-01-2021.pdf Relevant paragraphs: 2 (c) ….The opinion of the learned judge that the petitioner has been dragging on the suit proceeding is formed on the basis of what has been reflected in the Order Sheet; there is …
Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 138. Return of cheque with endorsement “account closed”, “payment stopped”, “referred to the drawer”,” “signatures do not match”, “image is not found”. Any attempt to prevent the cheque from being honoured would be an offence. Supreme Court.
Laxmi Dyechem v. State of Gujarat, (2012) 13 SCC 375. Judgment Link: https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/39772.pdf Relevant paragraphs: 16. The above line of decisions leaves no room for holding that the two contingencies envisaged under Section 138 of the Act must be interpreted strictly or literally. We find ourselves in respectful agreement with the decision in Magma case …
Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 138. Notice returned with endorsement “addressee is left”. Same does not amount to deemed service of notice. Accused is entitled to benefit of doubt regarding service of notice. Andra Pradesh High Court.
K. Annaji Rao vs N. Krishna Raju Sekhar (2004) 2 AP LJ 63 (SN) PDF of the Judgment HELD: In Sridhar M.A. V. Metalloy N.Steel Corpn (2000 (1) SCC 397) the apex Court held that notice should not be deemed to have been served as a matter of course and deemed service is to be …
“Forum Shopping” costs Rs. 1,00,000/- to this litigant !
{“Forum Shopping” is a term for the practice of unscrupulous trying to get their cases heard in the court which they perceive is most likely to provide a favorable judgment.} The Karnataka High Court, Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, castigated a litigant who wanted his matter to be heard by a non-Karnataka Judge …
Continue reading ““Forum Shopping” costs Rs. 1,00,000/- to this litigant !”
Daksha Legal 