Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 225 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 232Nominal Index: Uma & ANR AND Banshankar & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 225Chinnaswamy K AND Theosophy Company (Mysore) Pvt Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 226The State of Karnataka AND Anil N B. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 227Nagabhushan Reddy N & ANR AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 228ABC AND State...
Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 225 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 232
Nominal Index:
Uma & ANR AND Banshankar & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 225
Chinnaswamy K AND Theosophy Company (Mysore) Pvt Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 226
The State of Karnataka AND Anil N B. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 227
Nagabhushan Reddy N & ANR AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 228
ABC AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 229
Adhilakshmi & Others AND K Chidanand. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 230
Ando Paul AND G Ismail Musliyar. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 231
ABC AND XYZ. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 232
Judgments/Orders
Case Title: Uma & ANR AND Banshankar & Others
Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9908 OF 2018
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 225
The Karnataka High Court recently directed attaching the property of a man by creating a charge over his property to secure payment of maintenance to his estranged wife and differently-abled son.
A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde allowed the application filed by the wife and child for attaching the property of the husband. It said “Charge is created over the said property to secure payment of maintenance to the plaintiffs. The property standing in the name of the 1st defendant described in the schedule given below, and any other property in the name of the 1st defendant, if the property details are furnished by the plaintiff, shall carry the charge of maintenance ordered by this Court.”
Case Title: Chinnaswamy K AND Theosophy Company (Mysore) Pvt Ltd
Case No: CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 483 OF 2023
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 226
The Karnataka High Court has held that by providing a rent-free accommodation, as a term of employment, would create a jural relationship of a 'landlord and tenant' between an employer and an employee.
A single judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda dismissed a petition filed by Chinnaswamy K who had sought quashing of the judgment and decree dated 08.06.2023 passed by the small causes court, allowing the suit filed by Theosophy Company (Mysore) Pvt Ltd and directed the petitioner to vacate the suit schedule property and hand over possession of the same to the respondent herein.
Case Title: The State of Karnataka AND Anil N B
Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.106/2018
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 227
The Karnataka High Court recently set aside an acquittal order passed by the trial court and convicted a son for offences under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, for assaulting and causing the death of his 60-year-old mother.
A division bench of Justice K S Mudagal and Justice T.G. Shivashankare Gowda allowed the appeal filed by the state government and set aside the trial court acquitting Anil N B for the charge of murdering his mother Gangamma.
The bench said “The holistic appreciation of the evidence shows that the prosecution discharged its burden of proving that the victim suffered injuries due to the assault by the accused which led to her death. The appreciation of the evidence by the Trial Court is contrary to the material on record, the circumstances of the case and the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to supra. Hence the same is perverse or patently illegal.”
Case Title: Nagabhushan Reddy N & ANR AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 23631 OF 2023
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 228
The Karnataka High Court has directed the authorities to implement the Parking Policy 2.0. The Court directed the Commissioner of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to by June 20 submit a detailed project report on the methodology of implementation of the Parking Policy, before the court.
A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said “Though Parking Policy 2.0 is stated to have come into force in December 2020, the Area Parking Plan, parking charges framework, the streamlining of on-street parking, initiation of a pilot permit system etc., has not been carried out by the BBMP. The inaction on part of BBMP and/or Directorate of Urban Land Transport in doing the needful has resulted in inconvenience to the general public as can be seen in the present matter and inconvenience is being caused to the petitioners.”
Case Title: ABC AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION (H C) NO.41 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 229
The Karnataka High Court recently disposed of habeas corpus petition filed by a mother of a girl after the detenue girl informed the court that she has married and is staying with her Muslim husband in Kerala and does not intend to go back to her parents.
A division bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav and Justice Venkatesh Naik T said “The concerned Police are directed to hand over the detenue to the custody of respondent no.6 forthwith.” The court also took on record the voluntary undertaking filed by the husband wherein he undertakes to care of the safety, welfare and education of the detenue.
Case Title: Adhilakshmi & Others AND K Chidanand
Case No: REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 764 OF 2010
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 230
The Karnataka High Court has held that the wife of an original allottee becomes the absolute owner of the property if, before registration of property, the allottee died and thereafter on making the necessary payment the property is transferred in the woman's name.
A single judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah dismissed an appeal filed by Adhilakshmi and others challenging a trial court order dismissing their suit for partition and separate possession of the property.
Case Title: Ando Paul AND G Ismail Musliyar
Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 2 OF 2018
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 231
The Karnataka High Court has acquitted an Editor/Publisher of a local magazine who was convicted on charges of defamation holding that cognizance of the offence was taken after 8 years of filing the complaint by the trial court.
A single-judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah acquitted Ando Paul, who was convicted of offences under Sections 500, 501 and 502 of the Indian Penal Code.
The bench relied on Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which pertains to the bar on taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation. It said, “On careful reading of the above said provision, it makes it clear that cognizance should be taken within 3 years if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, but not exceeding 3 years.”
Case Title: ABC AND XYZ
Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2107 OF 2020
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 232
The Karnataka High Court recently allowed an appeal filed by a woman challenging the order of the trial court dismissing her petition seeking divorce and held that unfounded allegation on the character of a spouse causes mental cruelty and can be a ground for dissolution of marriage.
A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde allowed the appeal filed by the woman and said “The institution of marriage rests on the mutual trust, confidence, love and respect between the couple. When one spouse makes an allegation suspecting the character of the other and if that allegation is not substantiated, the Court has to hold that the allegation is unfounded. The unfounded allegation on the character of a spouse shakes the edifice of the institution of marriage. In such a situation, it would be extremely difficult for the spouse to live peacefully in matrimony.”