Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 07 To October 13, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 428 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 435

Nominal Index:

B J Rajni & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 428

The Legal Manager Shriram General Insurance Company Limited AND Nagamma & Others and Smt Nagamma and Others AND Sri P Penkatesh and others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 429

M S Praveen Kumar AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 430

S Bsavaraj AND Bar Council of India & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 431

Arunkumar AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 432

Pradosh S Rao AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 433

Vishwanath Basappa Batti AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 434

Nagabhushana B AND Registrar General & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 435

Judgments/Orders

'Heart Of Cardio Institute Itself Not In Right Place': Karnataka HC While Regularising Service Of Nurses Engaged On Contract Since 20 Yrs

Case Title: B J Rajni & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 12683 OF 2023 C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 12691 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 428

The Karnataka High Court has come to the aid of Ten Staff Nurses (Stipendiary) working on contractual basis for over 20 years in Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research, by directing that their services be regularised from the date they completed 10 years of service.

A single judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda allowed the petitions filed by B J Rani and others and said “Having regard to the fact that the petitioners have worked for more than 20 years, it would be just and necessary to direct the respondents to regularise the services of petitioners from the date they completed 10 years of service. The respondents shall not take into consideration the renewal break of a day or two while computing this period of 10 years.”

Insurer Has To Pay Claimants, Recover Amount From Vehicle Owner In Absence Of Valid Permit At The Time Of Accident: Karnataka HC Reiterates

Case Title: The Legal Manager Shriram General Insurance Company Limited AND Nagamma & Others and Smt Nagamma and Others AND Sri P Penkatesh and others

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7089 OF 2016 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6824 OF 2016.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 429

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that even though the vehicle which causes an accident does not hold a valid permit and fitness certificate at the time of accident, the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation amount due to the claimants and recover it from the vehicle's owner.

A single judge bench of Justice T G Shivashankare Gowda refused to accept the contention of Shriram General Insurance Company Limited that at the time of accident, the vehicle in question was plying on the road without valid permit and fitness certificate. The court rejected the company's argument that since a "fundamental breach" on vehicle owner's part is "demonstrated", so the Insurance Company can avoid its "liability completely" and its for the owner to pay the compensate the claimant.

Party Cannot Mount Fresh Challenge Against Land Grant Order Or Claim Title Over Property In Review Plea: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M S Praveen Kumar AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.1713 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 430

The Karnataka High Court has said that parties cannot be permitted to mount a fresh challenge to a land grant order which has been duly upheld by the coordinate Bench, under the guise of a review petition.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum dismissed a petition filed by one M S Praveen Kumar and said, “Allowing such a challenge would not only undermine the established legal tenets but also threaten the stability of property rights that rely on judicial finality.”

Bar Council Of India Cannot Issue Gag Orders Restraining Speech Of Advocates Or Its Members: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: S Bsavaraj AND Bar Council of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.11480 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 431

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Bar Council of India (BCI) does not have the power to issue gag orders restraining the speech of Advocates or even the members of the Bar Council.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “The Chairman of the Bar Council of India ostensibly cannot pass any such gag order which takes away the fundamental right of any Advocate. The power of the Courts either competent civil court or the constitutional Court, cannot be permitted to be usurped by the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, as is done in the case at hand.”

Registration Of FIR U/S 154 CrPC After BNSS Came Into Force Not A Curable Defect: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Arunkumar AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200913 OF 2024.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 432

The Karnataka High Court has held that from July 1, 2024 onwards when the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) came into force, the police registering an FIR under the repealed Criminal Procedure Code, is incorrect.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan, sitting at Kalaburagi bench, allowed the petition filed by Arunkumar and quashed the FIR registered against him under Section 376, 323, 506 and 420 of Indian Penal Code on July 1.

The court said “The FIR registered by the Lingasugur police in Crime No.180/2024 under Section 154 of Cr.P.C is hereby quashed. However, the complaint filed by the de-facto complainant is retained and remitted back to the police to register the FIR under Section 173 of BNSS and proceed to investigate the matter under BNSS and file a final report under Section 193 of BNSS.”

Can't Shift Undertrials From One Prison To Another At Whims And Fancies Of Prosecution: Karnataka HC In Murder Case Involving Actor Darshan

Case Title: Pradosh S Rao AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 23848 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 433

The Karnataka High Court has directed the prison authorities to re-shift one of the accused involved in the Renukaswamy murder case in which Kannada actor Darshan Thoogdeep Srinivas is also an accused, to the Central Prison, Bengaluru from Belagavi Central Prison.

Accused Darshan was recently spotted sitting along with other prisoners inside the prison and sipping coffee and smoking. His photographs went viral on social media. Following which a requisition came to be made before the Magistrate for shifting all the accused involved in the case.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Pradosh S Rao who is accused no. 14 in the case and set aside the order of the Magistrate court permitting his transfer.

Writ Petition Not Maintainable Against Refusal Of Interim Injunction If Decided After Hearing All Parties: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vishwanath Basappa Batti AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 202681 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 434

The Karnataka High Court has said that only an appeal can be filed against an order refusing interim injunction if the order is passed after hearing all the parties to the proceedings and a writ petition challenging the same is not maintainable.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj held thus while dismissing a petition filed by one Vishwanath Baati.

The petitioner had sought for issuance of writ of certiorari, quashing the impugned order passed by the trial court on the application made under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 and allow his application.

Karnataka HC Grants Relief To Court Officer, Directs Authority To Consider His Claim For Reimbursing Emergency Medical Expenses

Case Title: Nagabhushana B AND Registrar General & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 17956 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 435

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that government servants are entitled to reimbursement of medical expenses incurred at non-empanelled private hospitals provided they were referred there by a recognized government hospital.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by Nagabhushana B, an Assistant Court officer, who had questioned the order rejecting his application seeking reimbursement of the amount.