Karnataka High Court Monthly Digest: August 2023

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 291 To 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 336

Nominal Index:

Emmanuel Michael And Union of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 291

Lok Shikshan Trust & Others And Davalsab S/O Malliksab Nadaf. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 292

Nabisab s/o. Huchchesab Agnnamani AND Hatelsab s/o Huchchedab Sannamani. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 293

Vittal And The PSI of Bableshwar Police Station. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 294

A Amarnath Chagu And Union of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 295

FIS Payment Solutions And Services India Private Limited Vesrsus The State Of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 296

Rasik Lal Patel & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 297

M/s Legal Property & ANR And Chief Manager, State Bank of India & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 298

ABC And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 299

The Divisional Manager United India Insurance Company Ltd And Ramu @ Ramesh S/O Yallappa & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 300

Nanjamma & Others AND Rajamma & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 301

ABC And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 302

Sanjay P S And Abhishek M. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 303

Smt. Renuka & Ors. v Sri Venkatesh. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 304

State By PI MESCON v B Usman Beary. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 305

Shashikala & Others And Laxman Yadu Kadam and Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 306

N Ravindranath Kamath And Sri Subramanyeshwara Cooperative Bank Limited & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 307

SIVA RAMA KRISHNA And MR.SASI NARKIS BABU V & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 308

Raufuddin Kacheriwalay & Others And State of Karnataka & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 309

Malathy S B & Others AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 310

Nova Medical Centers Pvt Ltd And Sowmya & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 311

Girinath B And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 312

Vinayak Metrani And Gadigevva @ Neelavva & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 313

Krishnaprasad A AND L Doreswamy. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 314

Ananth Kumar K G And Yogita S @ Yogitha Ananth Kumar. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 315

Jagath Prakash Nadda And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 316

M J MAthew & others And Prestige St. Johns Wood Apartment Owners Association & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 317

Mahantayya And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 318

Ramesh Naik L And Karnataka State Bar Council and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 319

Chandra & Others AND G. Krishnappa. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 320

Dr Pooja S N v Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 321

Abdul Khadar @ Rafiq And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 322

Sam P Philip & Others v State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 323

Mahadev And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 324

MANSA–Centre for Development and Social Action v. Managing Director, Development Credit Bank & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 325

Sugurappa @ Sugurayya Swami v. The State Of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 326

Saibanna s/o Ningappa Natikar AND The Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 327

The Union of India v. Malini & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 328

Muzammil & ANR v. State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 329

Dr Lakhsmi P Gowda AND National Board of Examinations In Medical Sciences & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 330

Hampamma & Others And State Through Lingasugur P.S. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 331

A S MALLIKARJUNASWAMY, AND STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 332

Naveen Kumar H N & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 333

M/s Deco Equipments Pvt Ltd AND The State of Karnataka & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 334.

P Ramaprasad And Thyagaraj R & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 335

Jambo Plastics Pvt. Ltd & Others AND Chief Quality Assurance Establishment & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 336

Judgments/Orders

Second Stint Of Police Custody After Judicial Custody Of Accused Not Permissible: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Emmanuel Michael And Union of India

Case No: WP 17961/2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 291

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that an accused cannot be remanded to police custody a second time in the same case after the accused has been in judicial custody for a long time.

A Single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna partly allowed the petition filed by one Emmanuel Michael who is charged for offences under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) and declared as illegal the grant of police custody by the special court, six months after he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

Media Has Social Responsibility To Maintain Peace, Using Words 'Taliban' 'Goonda' Mentality Per Se Intolerable: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Lok Shikshan Trust & Others And Davalsab S/O Malliksab Nadaf

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100541 OF 2020 (482-) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100540 OF 2020 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100542 OF 2020 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100543 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 292

The Karnataka High Court has said that journalists, print and electronic media cater to the needs of the general public by publishing important news items and they owe a social responsibility to maintain peace and tranquillity.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda sitting at Dharwad said publication of news items has wide implications on the society at large and therefore, reports carried out in the print and electronic media are required to be strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Press Council of India. It added, “Using the words 'Taliban', 'Goonda', 'Pundatike' are per se intolerable and beyond the scope of the guidelines issued by the Press Council of India...Members of the print and electronic media are expected to carry news items in a most decent manner.”

Child Born In 'Batil' Marriage Is Illegitimate, Has No Right To Succession Of Father's Property: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Nabisab s/o. Huchchesab Agnnamani AND Hatelsab s/o Huchchedab Sannamani

Case No: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1467 OF 2007

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 293

The Karnataka High Court has said that a son, born in 'Batil' marriage (void-ab-initio) under Mohammadan Law, is illegitimate and does not possess any right of succession under the law.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda allowed the appeal filed by one Nabisab Agnnamani (original plaintiff) and set aside the order of the first appellate court which granted half share of ancestral property to Hatelsab Sannamani (original defendant), holding him to be a legitimate son born to Fakiramma through Huchchesab who is the father of the plaintiff.

Karnataka High Court Directs DGP To Issue SOP To All SHOs For Compliance Of Lalitha Kumari Judgment On Registration Of FIR

Case Title: Vittal And The PSI of Bableshwar Police Station

Case No: Writ Petition No. 201668/2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 294

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Director General of Police (DGP) to issue necessary circular/SOP to all (police) Station House Officers in respect of the directions issued in Lalita Kumari's case, regarding registration of FIRs when a cognizable offence is made out in the complaint and instruct them to follow it scrupulously.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj sitting at Kalaburagi gave the direction while allowing the petition filed by one Vittal. He had approached the court stating that complaint made by him on November 18, 2022 against certain persons has not been registered as a FIR by the respondent-police and no action has been taken thereon.

Centre Agrees In Karnataka High Court To Consider Representation Seeking Enquiry On 'Havana Syndrome' In India

Case Title: A Amarnath Chagu And Union of India

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 22221 OF 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 295

The Union Government has informed the Karnataka High Court that it would look into the representation made to it for conducting an enquiry on possibility of ‘Havana Syndrome’ in India.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit disposed of the petition filed by one A Amarnath Chagu and directed the Union Government to consider his representation in three months.

Havana Syndrome is a mysterious neurological illness that is said to have struck American diplomats and spies in many parts of the world. Many US officials and their family members have reported symptoms of the illness, which include migraines, nausea, memory lapses, and dizziness. American officials deputed at the US embassy in Cuba first reported the symptoms in 2016

ATM Management Service To Banks Are Pure Services, No VAT Payable: Karnataka High Court Quashes Re-assessment

Case Title: FIS Payment Solutions And Services India Private Limited Vesrsus The State Of Karnataka

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 9550 Of 2020 (T-RES)

Citation; 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 296

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the re-assessment and held that ATM management services to banks are pure services and will not attract Value Added Tax (VAT).

The bench of Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar has observed that the transaction is a pure service transaction, not entailing any transfer of property or effective control of the goods to the recipient. The various terms of the Agreements with the Banks disclose that the only intent of the contract is the provision of ATM management services, for which the petitioners deploy ATMs and other assets at various sites across India. The petitioners use the ATMs and other assets merely as a means for providing ATM management services to banks.

Karnataka High Court Criticizes Misuse Of SC/ST Prevention Of Atrocities Act, Quashes Criminal Case Over Property Dispute

Case Title: Rasik Lal Patel & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: Criminal Petition no.5497 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 297

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the prosecution initiated against two persons under provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered by the complainant immediately after the police filed a chargesheet against him on the complaint made by the petitioners, for house trespass and continuous harassment.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the petition filed by Rasik Lal Patel and another said, “This case would form a classic illustration of misuse of the provisions of the Act and the penal provisions under the IPC. It is such cases which clog the criminal justice system and consume considerable time of the Courts, be it the Magistrates Court, Court of Session or this Court, while genuine cases where litigants have actually suffered would be waiting in the pipeline.”

SBI Is State Instrumentality, Writ Petition Maintainable Even In Disputes Pertaining To Contract For Loan Transaction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/s Legal Property & ANR And Chief Manager, State Bank of India & ANR

Case No: WP 11203/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 298

The Karnataka High Court recently set aside an endorsement issued by the State Bank of India to a partnership firm, stopping the release of loan amount which was sanctioned and partly disbursed.

While the bank resisted the writ petition stating the loan transaction was in the nature of a 'private contract', a single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit observed, “The respondent-bank being an instrumentality of the State under Article 12 of the Constitution, even in matters like this, writ remedy can be granted to the aggrieved...A banker who answers description of State under Article 12 of the Constitution cannot act like a private lender; its actions have to be animated with reason & justice, which factors are militantly absent in the impugned endorsement/notice. Therefore the same is liable to be invalidated.”

Wife Insulted, Moved Away From Husband Because Of His 'Dark Complexion': Karnataka High Court Dissolves Marriage On Ground Of Cruelty

Case Title: ABC And XYZ

Case NO: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8998 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 299

The Karnataka High Court has held that a wife insulting the husband on the premise that he is 'dark', moving away from his company for the same reason and levelling false allegations of illicit relationships as a cover up, would constitute cruelty.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Anant Ramanath Hegde thus allowed the appeal filed by the husband and set aside the family court order refusing divorce decree. It said, “The wife used to insult the husband on the premise that he is dark. And for the same reason has moved away from the company of the husband without any cause. And to cover up this aspect, has levelled false allegations of illicit relationships against the husband. These facts certainly will constitute cruelty.”

Karnataka High Court Directs Integration Of Police IT System With Road Accident Database, FSL, Insurance Depts

Case Title: The Divisional Manager United India Insurance Company Ltd And Ramu @ Ramesh S/O Yallappa & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.201961 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 300

The Karnataka High Court reiterated that Motor Vehicles Act being a beneficial legislation, the provisions thereof have to be given beneficial meaning and effect.

It held that benefit under the Act cannot be taken away on a technical aspect that too of limitation under Section 166(3) of the Act, which mandates that no claim petition can be entertained unless it is made within six months of the occurrence of the accident.

Order 39 CPC | Suppression Of Material Facts Detrimental To Grant Of Temporary Injunction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Nanjamma & Others AND Rajamma & Others

Case No: M.F.A No 2172/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 301

The Karnataka High Court recently held that relief of temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is a discretionary remedy which requires a careful balance between the need for interim relief and the ongoing legal proceedings.

Justice H.P Sandesh added that this discretion should not be exercised when material facts are suppressed before the Trial Court and that any false or misleading information in obtaining such interim relief can be detrimental to the integrity of the judicial process.

Class 1 Admissions: Karnataka High Court Refuses To Interfere With State's Policy Fixing '6 Years' As Eligibility Criteria

Case Title: ABC And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 11173/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 302

The Karnataka High Court has upheld State government's decision fixing the admission age for class-I students in Government schools, aided and unaided schools from the academic year 2025-2026 as 6 years.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum dismissed a petition filed on behalf of a 4 year old toddler, represented through her father, seeking to quash the notification/order dated 26.07.2022.

S.397 CrPC | Revision Petition Before Sessions Court Against Order Passed By Magistrate U/S 143A NI Act Maintainable: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sanjay P S And Abhishek M

Case No: Criminal Petition No: 5944/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 303

The Karnataka High Court has held that a revision petition preferred before the Sessions court under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging an order made by the Magistrate Court under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is maintainable.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said, “An order passed on an application filed under Section 143A of the Act, is not interlocutory order, but an intermediate order, as the application is filed, and the application is closed, under the said provision, determining the rights and liabilities of parties qua the application and revision petition before the Court of Sessions on the order passed by the learned Magistrate under Section 143A either allowing the application, or rejecting it, would be maintainable for the aggrieved party, be it the complainant or the accused to approach.”

[Maintenance] S.125 CrPC Doesn't Require Wife To Prove 'Sufficient Cause For Living Separately' From Husband: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Smt. Renuka & Ors. v Sri Venkatesh

Case No: RPFC No. 100033/2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 304

The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, has held that maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (“Cr.P.C”) do not require proof regarding sufficient cause for living separately.

“It is clear from a clean reading of Section 125 of Cr.P.C, that the proceedings are summary in nature and it is sufficient if negligence or refusal on the part of the husband in providing maintenance to the wife is demonstrated. The proceedings do not contemplate the proof regarding sufficient cause for living separately”, the Court held.

Electricity Act | Minimum Sentence Under S.135 Can't Be Less Than Three Times The Financial Gain: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: State By PI MESCON v B Usman Beary

Case No: Criminal Appeal 1128/2011

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 305

The Karnataka High Court has enhanced the fine imposed on a convict from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 1,08,189/- for theft of electricity, while observing that the minimum sentence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for the first conviction cannot be less than three times the financial gain.

The Bench comprising Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar thus allowed an appeal preferred by the State Government praying to enhance the fine amount imposed by the Special Court against an Accused for theft of electricity.

S.120 Evidence Act | Wife Competent To Depose On Behalf Of Plaintiff Even In Absence Of Power Of Attorney: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Shashikala & Others And Laxman Yadu Kadam and Others

Case No: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1832 OF 2005

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 306

The Karnataka High Court has said the wife of a plaintiff, even in the absence of power of attorney issued to her, is competent enough to depose on behalf of the original plaintiff in a civil suit.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda, sitting at Dharwad, recently dismissed an appeal filed by Shashikala and others challenging an order passed by the First appellate court which reversed the trial court order dismissing the suit filed by Laxman Yadu Kadam, seeking a declaration of right over the disputed property and for restraining the defendants from disturbing the actual possession and lawful wahivat of the plaintiffs.

No Special Treatment For Lawyers And Judges In Loan Recovery: Karnataka HC Dismisses Senior Advocate's Plea Against 'Coerced Proceedings'

Case Title: N Ravindranath Kamath And Sri Subramanyeshwara Cooperative Bank Limited & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 3791 OF 2021 (GM-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 1 OF 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 307

The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by Senior Advocate N Ravindranath Kamath, challenging the 'coercive' loan recovery proceedings instituted against him under the SARFAESI Act by the Sri Subramanyeshwara Cooperative Bank Limited for being a chronic loan defaulter.

Justice Krishna S Dixit said, “A borrower is a borrower, whether he is a practising lawyer or a sitting Judge. Loan laws do not provide for favourable treatment to them differential qua other borrowers, when they become chronic defaulters. An argument to the contrary offends equality/parity in matters of loan recovery and therefore, cannot be countenanced.”

Dark Web | Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash 'Light Combat Aircraft' Data Theft Case Against 27-Yr-Old Aerospace Engineer

Case Title: SIVA RAMA KRISHNA And MR.SASI NARKIS BABU V & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.1985 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 308

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated against 27-year-old, who is accused of leaking the data of the Light Combat Aircraft developed under the Tejas programme by Aeronautical Development Agency, on the dark web for enriching himself.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Siva Rama Krishna Chennuboina seeking to quash proceedings initiated in 2021 against him under sections 66, 66(F), 84(C) of the Information Technology Act, 2008 and Section 380 of the IPC.

Haj | Chairman's Tenure Cannot Be Extended Beyond Tenure Of Committee: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Raufuddin Kacheriwalay & Others And State of Karnataka & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.648 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 309

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the Chairman and Members of the State Haj Committee to extend the tenure of the Chairman and the Committee, beyond three years from the date of election, as the appointment of the Chairman was notified at a belated stage, post directions from the High Court.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Raufuddin Kacheriwalay and others and said, "The office of Chairman ordinarily has a prescribed tenure and such tenure begins from the day one of the Committee regardless of its incumbency. Section 21(1) mandates the government to convene the maiden meeting of the Committee within 45 days of its formation for electing one of its members as the Chairman. If delay is brooked in conducting such a meeting that does not elongate the tenure of the electee as the Chairman. In other words, the tenure of the Chairman is coterminous with that of his membership and once he ceases to be a member by resignation, removal or expiry of his membership, his Chairmanship also stands determined."

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Abetment Of Suicide Case Against Three For Allegedly Teasing Colleague Over Sexual Orientation

Case Title: Malathy S B & Others AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 11745/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 310

The Karnataka High Court recently refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated against three employees of Lifestyle International Private Limited, accused of teasing their colleague on his sexual orientation, which is alleged to have caused him to commit suicide.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Malathy S B, Deputy General Manager in Marketing; Kumar Suraj, Vice-President in Human Resources and Nitish Kumar, Assistant Manager in Marketing, who are charged under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

Objection To Civil Suit In View Of Arbitration Clause To Be Raised Before Court Of First Instance: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Nova Medical Centers Pvt Ltd And Sowmya & ANR

Case No: RFA 937/2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 311

The Karnataka High Court has set aside a trial court order dismissing a suit filed by Nova Medical Centers Pvt Ltd. on the premise that the dispute is arbitrable. Court noted that the defendant had failed to raise objection as to jurisdiction of Civil Court.

A single judge bench of Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde observed,“It is a well-settled principle of law that the objection to entertain the suit based on the arbitration Clause is to be raised before the Court at the first appearance and not later.”

"Fading Away Of Intimacy" After 6 Yrs Of Consensual Sex Not Rape: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Girinath B And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.6863 OF 2022 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.6485 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 312

“Fading away of the intimacy after six years of consensual acts of sexual intercourse cannot mean that it would become ingredients of Section 375 [Rape] of the IPC,” the Karnataka High Court observed recently.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna thus quashed a rape case registered by a woman against her live-in partner whom she had befriended on Facebook. It added, “They were consensual acts from day one and consensual acts till 27-12-2019. The period is six long years. Therefore, it cannot but be construed that it would not be a rape for it to become punishable under Section 376 of the IPC. If further proceedings are permitted to continue as observed hereinabove, it would run foul of a plethora of judgments rendered by the Apex Court on the issue.”

At Stage Of Preliminary Decree, Purchaser Of Undivided Interest Has No Say In A Partition Suit: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vinayak Metrani And Gadigevva @ Neelavva & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 106032 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 313

The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, has held that the purchaser of an undivided interest, who has no locus in a partition suit, has no say at the stage of preliminary decree. The Court was adjudicating a writ petition, wherein the purchaser of an undivided interest had challenged the order of Civil Court passed in a partition suit allowing amendment to the same.

The bench comprising of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum observed, “It is quite strange to know that petitioner who is purchaser of undivided interest who has no locus in a partition suit has ventured in challenging the order passed on amendment application. While drawing a preliminary decree, a stranger-purchaser has no say in the suit. Merely because, he is impleaded in the suit, will not give a right to him to dictate as to how the suit has to be proceeded with. His rights, if any, in an undivided interest has to be worked out in final decree proceedings.”

[Rent Control] Parties' Legal Rights Fixed At Suit Initiation, Subsequent Events Don't Affect Jurisdiction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Krishnaprasad A AND L Doreswamy

Case No: HOUSE RENT REV. PETITION NO.10/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 314

The Karnataka High Court recently reiterated that the legal rights of parties become established as of the date the legal action is initiated, such as filing a suit and that subsequent events that occur after the initiation of legal proceedings do not affect the jurisdiction of the court.

Justice H P Sandesh added that events such as the tenant approaching the Rent Controller to fix a fair rent, cannot retroactively create rights that affect the court's jurisdiction. “it is well settled principle that right of parties crystallizes to the date of institution of the suit...the date of filing of the petition is the relevant date to consider the jurisdiction and not subsequent any conduct will not oust the jurisdiction."

Diabetes Is 'Manageable', Not Excuse To Avoid Payment Of Maintenance To Wife & Children: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ananth Kumar K G And Yogita S @ Yogitha Ananth Kumar

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 12802 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 315

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the petition filed by one Ananth Kumar KG questioning the order of family court directing him to pay Rs 10,000 as monthly maintenance to his estranged wife.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit rejected the contention of the petitioner that he has been suffering from diabetes and related ailments, thus he is not able to pay monthly maintenance amount for the upkeep of his minor child for the last three years. The bench said, “A large section of people all over the world suffer from such ailments and with the advancement of medical science, all that is manageable. It is not the case of the petitioner that the same are not manageable with proper medical care.”

Karnataka High Court Quashes 'Reckless, Vague' Case Against BJP Chief JP Nadda For 'Wooing' Voters

Case Title: Jagath Prakash Nadda And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: Criminal Petition no. 5488 of 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 316

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against National President of Bharatiya Janata Party and a former Union Minister, Jagath Prakash Nadda for allegedly wooing and threatening voters during an election rally held in May ahead of Assembly elections.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna found the FIR under Section 171-F of IPC was 'recklessly' registered against Nadda on the basis of a 'loosely laid offence' in a 'vague complaint'.

Private Association Of Apartment Owners Not 'State' U/Article 12: Karnataka HC Dismisses Writ Plea Against 'Facilitation Charge' For Tenancy

Case Title: M J MAthew & others And Prestige St. Johns Wood Apartment Owners Association & ANR

Case No: WP 2881/2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 317

The Karnataka High Court recently refused to entertain a writ petition moved by certain flat owners questioning the amendment of bye laws of the Apartment Owners' Association which paved way for levy of 'Facilitation Charge' from owners who had let out their apartments on lease, licence, tenancy or otherwise.

A single judge bench of Justice R Nataraj dismissed the petition filed by questioning the action of the Prestige St Johns Wood Apartment Owners Association which is constituted under the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972.

'Proximate Incident' Necessary For Passing Externment Order: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mahantayya And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No. 104804/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 318

The Karnataka High Court has quashed an externment order passed by the authorities against one Mahantayya, who was externed from Bailhongal Subdivision to Bagalkot for a period of three months.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna sitting at Dharwad said, “Provisions of law which empower externment of a person would undoubtedly mean that there should be minimum proximity or necessity for passing an order of externment. There is no proximate incident that is narrated in the impugned order. Without any foundation the order projects the petitioner as a bane to the society or the surrounding area.”

Plea To Include Advocates' Parents As Dependents For Medical Insurance Withdrawn From Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ramesh Naik L And Karnataka State Bar Council and Ors.

Case No: WP (FR) NO.14863/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 319

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday permitted withdrawal of a public interest litigation filed by Advocate Ramesh Naik L, seeking a direction to the Karnataka State Bar Council (KSBC) and the Bar Council of India (BCI) to take appropriate action to include Parents of Advocates as dependents in the model form provided by the State Bar Council to provide Medical insurance, Term insurance for Advocates.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice M G S Kamal said, “After arguing for sometime the party in person seeks leave to withdraw the PIL with liberty to file a proper and comprehensive PIL. Allowed to withdraw with liberty as prayed for.”

Onus On Plaintiff To Prove Possession Of Property In Suit For Bare Injunction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Chandra & Others AND G. Krishnappa.

Case NO: WRIT PETITION NO. 19003 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 320

The Karnataka High Court recently held that in a suit for bare injunction, it is for the person who approaches the Court to prove his lawful possession over the suit schedule property.

Justice S G Pandit added that in such cases, the defendant is not required to move an application to prove the authenticity of the documents produced by the plaintiff during the course of evidence. "In a suit for bare injunction, it is for the person who approaches the Court to prove his lawful possession... In the course of trial admittedly the respondent/plaintiff has marked exhibits P11 to P23, documents said to have been issued by the BBMP or the Grama Panchayath of Tanisandra. Therefore, it is for the plaintiff to prove the documents in accordance with law and it is for the Trial Court, at the time of final disposal, to evaluate and to appreciate the documents and its genuineness."

Medical Board Can Only Decide Extent Of Candidate's Disability, Not Their Eligibility For A Course: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dr Pooja S N v Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 16631 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 321

The Karnataka High Court has recently held that the Medical Board as an expert body is only authorised to determine the extent of a candidate's disability, and cannot draw a conclusion about whether a candidate would be eligible to pursue a medical course.

A division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil on going through the records added that the Medical Board is not the selecting authority to certify the eligibility of a candidate. “The eligibility of a candidate is to be concluded by the respondents and it certainly is not within the domain of the Medical Board. Being an expert body it was merely required to assess and certify the extent of disability, in our opinion the conclusion drawn by the board is wholly unsustainable being illegal and as the board is not the selecting authority the eligibility of a candidate cannot be certified by the board.”

Article 20 | No Conviction U/S 376(3) IPC For Rape Of Woman Under 16 Yrs Age Committed Prior To 2018 Amendment: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Abdul Khadar @ Rafiq And State of Karnataka & ANR.

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 150 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 322

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the conviction handed down to a man for raping his minor step daughter, but modified the sentence of 20 years imposed on him by the trial court to 10 years imprisonment.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan partly allowed the appeal filed by 45 years old Abdul Khadar @ Rafiq, who was convicted to 20 years under section 376 (3) of the Indian Penal Code, for an offence committed in 2015.

How Is Offering Prayers A Threat? Karnataka High Court Quashes PIL Challenging Use Of Residential Premises As Prayer Hall

Case Title: Sam P Philip & Others v State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 8389/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 323

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a PIL filed by residents of HBR Layout in Bengaluru, who opposed the use of a residential property as a prayer hall.

During the hearing, a division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice M G S Kamal took strong exception to the oral submission made by the counsel for the petitioner that 'offering prayers was a risk'.

“We will not accept this. Offering a prayer is not a risk. Mr Counsel, you probably made this statement under an erroneous impression, please think twice before making a statement. We are not permitting such statements. This is something to which we have strong objections, you can’t make a statement so casually. You are a lawyer, please don't make such statements, this is not done. You have no right to make such sweeping statements. One can only say that there is some violation of rules, please ask the authorities. How can you say someone offering prayer is a threatening activity?”

Virtual Cross Examination Doesn't Prejudice Accused: Karnataka HC Refuses To Order Physical Presence Of Judge Appearing As Witness In Criminal Case

Case Title: Mahadev And State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition No 200953/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 324

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by an accused seeking physical presence of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Vijayapura (now posted in Bengaluru) for cross examination as a witness in his case, instead of via video conferencing. A single judge bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T. sitting at Kalaburagi said recording of evidence through video conferencing is permissible in view of proviso to Section 275(1) of CrPC, as amended in 2008.

Permanent FCRA Registration Doesn't Guarantee Foreign Fund Crediting Without Ministry's Clearance: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: MANSA–Centre for Development and Social Action v. Managing Director, Development Credit Bank & Others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.6111/2014

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 325

The Karnataka High Court recently ruled that permanent registration under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) did not endow an unequivocal right to credit foreign funds into their designated savings account without authorisation from the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Justice K S Hemalekha thus dismissed a petition filed by MANSA seeking a direction to the Development Credit Bank (DCB) to release frozen funds received from a foreign donor Dan Church Aid which has been put under the ‘prior approval category’ by the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Criminal Intimidation | Mere Expression Of Words Without Intention Insufficient To Attract Section 506 IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sugurappa @ Sugurayya Swami v. The State Of Karnataka

Case NO: Criminal Petition No.201248 of 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 326

The Karnataka High Court has held that mere expression of words without any intention to cause alarm to the complainant or to make him to do or omit to do any act, is not sufficient to bring the act of the accused within the definition of criminal intimidation, as prescribed under section 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

A Single judge bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T thus quashed a trial court order taking cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal, 1860 against the accused.

After 30 Yrs In Jail, Karnataka HC Commutes Sentence Of 70-Yrs-Old Death Row Convict, Criticizes Unexplained Delay In Deciding Mercy Petition

Case Title: Saibanna s/o Ningappa Natikar AND The Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition no. 3297 of 2013

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 327

The Karnataka High Court has set aside the death penalty imposed on a 70-year-old murder convict and commuted it to life imprisonment, after he spent 30 years behind bars and of which almost two decades he spent in solitary confinement.

A division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice C M Poonacha allowed the writ petition filed by Saibanna Ningappa Natikar on two grounds—in-ordinate delay of 7 years and eight months in deciding his mercy petition and that he was made to suffer a singular cell confinement/solitary confinement without the sanction of law.

Railway Claims Tribunal Cannot Punish Any Person For Non-Payment Of Award Passed By It: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Union of India v. Malini & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 12947 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 328

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Railway Claims Tribunal has no power to punish any person for disobeying its orders, granting compensation to claimants.

A single judge bench of Justice R Nataraj allowed the petition filed by the Union of India and quashed a 2017 order passed by the Tribunal, issuing show cause notice to the General Manager, South Western Railway, as to why action should not be initiated against him for non-compliance of the order of the Tribunal.

Hijab Ban Row: Karnataka High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Two Youth Accused Of Making Graffiti On Govt School Wall

Case Title: Muzammil & ANR v. State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101193 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 329

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered against two youth accused of writing “Hijab is our dignity” with black paint on the walls of a Government Girls High School, near CMC Hosapete, Vijayanagara.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna sitting at Dharwad allowed the petition filed by Muzammil (23) and Mohammad Jamaul (25), and quashed the proceedings initiated against them under Section 3 of the Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1981.

Inadvertence No Reason To Deny Opportunity To Candidate Otherwise Entitled: Karnataka HC Permits NEET-PG Aspirant To Correct Caste & Avail Quota

Case Title: Dr Lakhsmi P Gowda AND National Board of Examinations In Medical Sciences & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 12859/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 330

The Karnataka High Court has come to the aid of a 23 years old student, who while filling-up the online registration application for National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test-PG (NEET-PG), inadvertently failed to choose her caste under the quota reserved for OBC category.

A division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil allowed the petition filed by Dr. Lakshmi P Gowda and directed the National Board of Examinations In Medical Sciences to permit her to correct the entry in Column No.7 of the application/score card and amend it to read from General to OBC.

Swachh Bharat Mission: Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Case For Alleged Misappropriation Of About 70L Sanctioned For Public Toilets

Case Title: Hampamma & Others And State Through Lingasugur P.S

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200652/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 331

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by seven persons accused of misappropriating funds sanctioned in respect of 'Swachh Bharat Mission Project' for construction of toilets within the limits of Honnalli, Gudadanal and Yaradona Villages between July 2016 and May 2017.

A single bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T, sitting at Kalaburagi dismissed the petition filed by Hampamma and others who are charged for offences punishable under sections 420, 409, 201, of the Indian Penal Code. It said, “On perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioners without constructing toilets misappropriated the funds to the tune of Rs.68.19 lakhs sanctioned by the Government under 'Swachh Bharat Mission'. Admittedly, disputed question of fact cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., at this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen.”

Employee Can Access Colleague's Service Records Under RTI Act To Pursue Service Litigation : Karnataka High Court

Case Title: A S MALLIKARJUNASWAMY, AND STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER & others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 23695 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 332

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the State Information Commissioner rejecting an application filed by a college professor seeking service record details of his colleague.

A single bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed the petition filed by A S Mallikarjunaswamy and set aside the of Commission whereby his RTI application had been negatived quoting the provisions of Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Not Prejudicial To Either Local Or Non Local Candidates: Karnataka High Court Upholds Recruitment Circular With Reservations U/Art 371J

Case Title: Naveen Kumar H N & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 4979 OF 2023 (S-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 6588 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 333

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the government circular dated 01.02.2023 which provides clarification on the application of reservations under Article 371J of the Constitution for candidates from the Kalyana Karnataka Region, formerly known as the Hyderabad-Karnataka region.

Justice N S Sanjay Gowda highlighted that the core objective of introducing special provisions in the Hyderabad-Karnataka region was to acknowledge its underdevelopment and offer incentives for education and employment. "...the very objective of amending the Constitution and making special provisions in respect of the Hyderabad-Karnataka region was to, firstly, acknowledge the fact that the Hyderabad-Karnataka region was not as well developed as the other parts of Karnataka and secondly, to make provisions to ensure that it was treated differently and grant incentives to the persons hailing from the region in the matter of providing education and employment (including by promotion to persons hailing from the region) so as to ensure that the Hyderabad-Karnataka region comes out of its backwardness. Thus, any orders made in exercise of the powers under Article 371J would have to be examined and considered keeping in mind this underlying objective."

Market Value Of Land Acquired Under 1894 Act Determined As Per Right To Fair Compensation Act Where Award Passed After Its Enforcement: Karnataka HC

Case Title: M/s Deco Equipments Pvt Ltd AND The State of Karnataka & others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.33180 OF 2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 334

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that the market value of land acquired under section 4(1) the Land Acquisition Act 1894, is to be determined as per Section 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013, if the award is passed after the 2013 Act came into force.

A single bench of S Sunil Dutt Yadav allowed the petition filed by M/s Deco Equipments Pvt Ltd and quashed the Award dated 20.01.2016 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, Mysore District.

Partition Suit After 90 Years Not Maintainable If Possession Not Delivered As Per Preliminary & Final Decrees: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: P Ramaprasad And Thyagaraj R & Others

Case No: CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.70/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 335

The Karnataka High Court has held that filing a suit for property partition after a lapse of 90 years of passing a final decree is not maintainable if the possession has not been delivered as per the preliminary and final decrees.

Justice H P Sandesh added that the same ought to have been enforced by filing an execution petition within the period of limitation.

"Having referred Section 47 of CPC, it is clear that when there was a decree between the parties and relating to the execution, discharge of satisfaction of the decree, shall be determined by the Court executing the decree and not by a separate suit. In the case on hand, already there was a decree in respect of the Munireddy’s share and pleading of the plaintiff also clear that share has been determined and final decree also was drawn on 14.5.1928 and instead of executing the final decree by filing execution petition, a separate suit is filed before the Court and hence, it is clear that it is nothing but clever drafting of the plaint while filing the suit for the relief of seeking once again for partition."

Executive Guidelines Cannot Supersede Works Of Defence Act For Building Permissions Around Military Establishments: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Jambo Plastics Pvt. Ltd & Others AND Chief Quality Assurance Establishment & Others.

Case No: Writ Petition No.40510 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 336

The Karnataka High Court has held that authorities cannot rely on executive guidelines for issue of NOC for regulating building constructions around Defence establishments, as long as the Works of Defence Act, 1903 is in operation.

A single bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav allowed the petition filed by Jambo Plastics Pvt Ltd and directed BBMP to consider sanctioning the former's plan, which is kept in abeyance, without insisting for adherence to the Guidelines dated 21-10-2016. It said, “Executive Guidelines have no place when the field is occupied by Legislation, the Guidelines cannot be relied upon by the Union Government to impose restriction as long as the Works of Defence Act, 1903 is in operation and is not amended."