Karnataka High Court Weekly Digest: December 23 - December 29, 2024

Citation 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 526 to 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 531

Nominal Index:

M Manjula & Others AND Deputy Commissioner & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 526

Union Bank of India & ANR AND V Harsih D Kamath & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 527

G Swamy AND B Devendrappa. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 528

Ms X AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 529

Chandra @Chandrashekhara Bhat AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 530

SRI.THANGAVELU. R v. SHRI. SANTHOSH. J. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 531

Judgments/Order

Unreasonable Delay In Seeking Restoration Of Granted Land Can Be Ground For Denying Relief: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M Manjula & Others AND Deputy Commissioner & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 210 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 526

The Karnataka High Court recently upheld an order of the single judge which dismissed a petition filed by the original grantee of a land who had sought restoration of land to themselves, 12 years after it was first transferred to private persons.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind dismissed an appeal filed by M Manjula and others who are heirs of one late Lakshmaiah, who belonged to the Scheduled Caste and came to be granted the land in question in the year 1981.

It said “In light of the above discussion and the position of law that would emerge, in the facts of the case, the restoration of the land cannot be permitted after 12 years.The question of latches would come into play. 12 years having been passed, it would be highly unreasonable, unjust and inequitable, as well as against law to grant any relief to the original grantee-the petitioner-appellant, permitting restoration of the land and to treat the transfer of the land taken place long back to be null and void.”

Bank Can Exercise General Lien To Appropriate Term Deposits Of Customers Toward Default Payment Of Loan: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Union Bank of India & ANR AND V Harsih D Kamath & ANR

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 679 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 527

The Karnataka High Court recently set aside an order of the single judge which had directed Union Bank of India to release the amount in Term Deposits which came to be appropriated towards the loan taken by a businessman, exercising its power of general lien over such deposits.

A division bench of Justice S G Pandit and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar allowed the appeal filed by the Bank and set aside the order dated May 2, 2023.

The bench said “It is observed in the impugned order in writ petition that, because of issuance of recovery certificate by the DRT the term deposits belongs to the petitioners are crystallized. But when the bank has got general lien over such deposits which is dealing in public money and has exercised its general lien as per the undertaking given by the father of the petitioners as well as now the petitioners the question of releasing the said deposit to the petitioners does not arise. Therefore, the appellants (Bank) have made out grounds to interfere with the impugned judgment.”

Election Petition Questioning Caste Certificate Of Elected Representative Maintainable Before High Court: Karnataka HC

Case Title: G Swamy AND B Devendrappa

Case No: ELECTION PETITION NO.19 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 528

The Karnataka High Court has held that Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990, does not take away the jurisdiction of the High Court to decide an election dispute questioning the caste of a returned candidate to the Legislative Assembly.

Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde dismissed the application made under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by B Devendrappa seeking to dismiss the election petition filed by G Swamy challenging Devendrappa's election.

Originally, Swamy–the petitioner had filed an election petition before the high court questioning the Devendrappa's (respondent) election to Jagaluru Vidhanasabha Constituency claiming that the Constituency is reserved for Scheduled Tribe whereas the respondent belongs to Other Backward Community and so is ineligible to contest the election.

Karnataka HC Orders Modification Of Name, Gender In Birth/Death Certificate Of Transgender Persons If Sought With Necessary Certificate

Case Title: Ms X AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 55559 OF 2017

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 529

The Karnataka High Court has asked the state government to suggest amendments to the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, and the rules framed thereunder to "give effect" to the Transgender Persons(Protection of Rights) Act 2019, in permitting change of name and gender of a transgender person in their birth/death certificate.

In doing so the court directed the Registrar to modify the birth and death certificate of transgender persons on submission of their application, if it is accompanied with requisite certificate concerning change in identity and gender as provided under Sections 6 (Issue of certificate of identity) and 7 (certificate of Change in gender) of the Transgender Persons(Protection of Rights) Act 2019.

'Permitting Trial Would Be An Exercise In Futility': Karnataka High Court Quashes 'Oldest Case' In State After 44 Yrs

Case Title: Chandra @Chandrashekhara Bhat AND State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition no. 12758 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 530

Closing perhaps the oldest criminal matter in the state, the Karnataka High Court recently quashed a 44-year old murder case registered against a man who is now 68 years old, remarking that permitting a trial would be a futile exercise.

Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the petition by Chadra alias V Chandrashekara Bhat, and after taking note of the facts observed that the impossibility of the petitioner looms large. It said:

“Therefore, if acquittal is eminent in a trial, permitting such trial against the accused would be nothing but waste of precious judicial time as is observed hereinabove. In the considered view of this Court, permitting a trial, which would be of no utility would only be an exercise in futility. Thus, ends the oldest case, in the criminal justice system, of the State, perhaps, which is 44 years old.”

Reference Application U/S 8 Of Arbitration Act Should Be Filed Within 120 Days From Date Of Service Of Summons: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: SRI.THANGAVELU. R v. SHRI. SANTHOSH. J

Case Number: CRP No. 265 of 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 531

The Karnataka High Court Bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar has held that a reference application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, should have been filed within a period of 120 days from the date of service of summons to the defendant, which was long passed before 20.03.2019. Thus, where the reference application under Section 8 of the Act was made long after the expiry of the outer limit of 120 days from the date of service of summons, such a reference could not be construed to have been made at the earliest.