Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 03 To July 09

Nominal Index

Mother Marry College of Nursing & Others And The Registrar. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 248

ABC And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 249

Francis Xavier Crasto And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 250

Sridhar Kulkarni A And Union of India & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 251

XYZ & ANR And Gurumanjunatha A S & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 252

K Srinivas Ganiga And Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 253

PRADNYA W/O. ABHIJIT WAINGANKAR And ABHIJIT S/O. MANOHAR WAINGANKAR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 254

Thimmaraju And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 255

Dr. Narasimhalu Nandini & ANR Janatha Trust & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 256

Lalitabai Patil And The Commissioner, Karnataka State Election Commission & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 257

Judgements/Orders

Karnataka High Court Directs Nursing College To Pay ₹10 Lakh Each To 10 Students For Year Loss

Case Title: Mother Marry College of Nursing & Others And The Registrar

Case NO: WRIT PETITION NO.200583 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 248

The Karnataka High Court has directed a Nursing college to compensate ten students a sum of Rs 10 lakhs each for causing the loss of one year by admitting the students post the deadline for admissions set by the University.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj directed the Mother Marry College of Nursing to compensate the students. Further, it directed the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, to initiate such action against the College as may be available in law including filing of criminal complaint and administrative action against charter of the respondent-University.

Husband Failed To File Objections: Karnataka High Court Allows Wife's Plea For Divorce On Ground Of Cruelty

Case Title: ABC And XYZ

Case NO: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4378 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 249

The Karnataka High Court has allowed a petition filed by a woman seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty, after the husband failed to challenge the petition or the evidence led by the wife.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde set aside the family court order rejecting the divorce petition. It said, “When there is no challenge to the petition as well as to the evidence led by the wife, this Court is of the view that the Family Court erred in rejecting the petition.”

S.452 CrPC | Seized Passport Cannot Be Withheld After Acquittal In Criminal Case Citing Pendency Of Appeal Period: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Francis Xavier Crasto And State of Karnataka

Case NO: Criminal Petition No. 4781 of 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 250

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that on an accused being acquitted by the trial court, his passport cannot be withheld on the ground that period for preferring an appeal against the order of acquittal is yet to get over.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by one Francis Xavier Crasto and directed the concerned court to release his passport.

Re-Issue Of Passport On Being Lost Cannot Be Done Without Registering FIR With Police: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sridhar Kulkarni A And Union of India & ANR

Case No: WP 9248/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 251

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday rejected a petition seeking direction to Regional Passport officer to re-issue petitioner's passport on him having lost the passport, without him registering a First Information Report with the police as is prescribed under the rules framed under the Passport Act.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit while dismissing the petition of one Sridhar Kulkarni A said, “Right to travel abroad is a Fundamental right is true but it is regulated by the Passport Act and rules framed thereunder. If rules prescribe a procedure, one has to follow the same by making appropriate application along with the requisite documents."

Karnataka HC Upholds Reduction Of Maintenance To 'Capable' Wife; Says She Can't Sit Idle, Can Only Seek 'Supportive Maintenance' From Husband

Case Title: XYZ & ANR And Gurumanjunatha A S & Others

Case No: Criminal Revision Petition no.1324 of 2015

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 252

The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by a woman challenging the order of the Appellate court reducing the maintenance and compensation amount granted to her by the Magistrate court on filing of an application under section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

A single judge bench of Justice Rajendra Badamikar observed that the petitioner-wife was working prior to her marriage and there is no explanation as to why she is incapable of working now. It added, “She is not supposed to sit idle and seek entire maintenance from her husband and she is also legally bound to make some efforts to meet her livelihood and she can seek only supportive maintenance from her husband.”

Senior Citizens Act | Lawyers Allowed To Represent Parties Before Maintenance Tribunal, Karnataka HC Declares Bar U/S 17 Ultra Vires Advocates Act

Case Title: K Srinivas Ganiga And Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.1912 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 253

The Karnataka High Court has declared Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, which bars advocates from representing parties before the tribunals/forums constituted under the Act, as ultra vires of Section 30 of the Advocates’ Act, 1961. It has thus permitted Advocates to represent parties before the tribunal/forums.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna held,“Parties to the lis cannot always be said to be conversant with terms, to be knowing the nuances of law of evidence, both oral or documentary, as to what is to be produced before the Tribunal. It is, therefore, a legal aid is necessary to such senior citizens. Legal aid, is trite, a facet of the constitutional right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and such legal aid or legal assistance cannot be stifled or crippled only to tendering advice.”

Cruelty Allegations Uncontroverted: Karnataka HC Sets Aside Order Denying Divorce To Wife For Not Honouring Restitution Of Conjugal Rights Decree

Case Title: PRADNYA W/O. ABHIJIT WAINGANKAR And ABHIJIT S/O. MANOHAR WAINGANKAR

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103166 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 254

The Karnataka High Court has allowed an appeal filed by a woman and set aside the order of the family court rejecting her plea for dissolving marriage, stating that despite the court allowing the application moved by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights, she had not returned to the matrimonial home.

A division bench of Justice S G Pandit and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil, said “The family Court has committed an error in recording the finding that despite the judgment in M.C.No.280/2019, the appellant has failed to join matrimonial home. The family Court has not considered the case of the appellant on its merits for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.”

Karnataka High Court Quashes Abetment To Suicide Charge Levelled Against Friend Of Dead Woman's Husband

Case Title: Thimmaraju And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 566 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 255

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed abetment to suicide charges levelled against a man who was alleged to have caused the suicide of his friend's wife by making allegations on her character.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said none of the ingredients necessary to prove an offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC are made out. It observed,

"For an offence to become punishable under Section 306 of IPC, the ingredients as obtaining under Section 107 of IPC is imperative. Section 107 of IPC deals with abatement. Any of the ingredients that are of Section 107 of IPC being present in a crime, then, it would become a matter of trial for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC."

Section 92 CPC Procedure Not Applicable To Suit Instituted By Public Charitable Trust Against Third Parties: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dr. Narasimhalu Nandini & ANR Janatha Trust & Others

Case No: Writ Petition no.203194 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 256

The Karnataka High Court has held that a Public Charitable Trust is not required to take permission from the jurisdictional district court under Section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), before filing a suit for permanent injunction against a third party.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj sitting at Kalaburagi bench dismissed the petition filed by Dr Narasimhalu Nandini Memorial Education Trust and others, challenging trial court order which rejected their application under Section 92, seeking dismissal of the suit filed by Janatha Trust, a Public Charitable Trust for non-compliance of the mandate under the provision.

Karnataka Gram Panchayat Act | No Show Cause Notice For Removal Of Member Over Failure To Annually Disclose Assets U/S 43B: High Court

Case Title: Lalitabai Patil And The Commissioner, Karnataka State Election Commission & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 200760 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 257

The Karnataka High Court has declared that no show-cause notice is required to be issued to a defaulting member of a Gram Panchayat under Section 43B(1) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 when there is no assets/liabilities declaration filed by him. Similarly, no hearing is required to be given before passing an order of removal from the office.

Section 43B stipulates that every member shall, within three months from the date of commencement of his term of office and until the expiry of his term in every calendar year, and within one month of the end of the financial year, file a declaration of the movable and immovable assets and liabilities of more than two lakhs owned by him and by all the members of his joint family before the state election commission.