Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: May 13 - May 19, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 218 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 224

Nominal Index:

Kalpatharu Breweries And Distilleries Pvt Ltd AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 218

Kumarvel Janakiram AND National Insurance Company LTD & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 219

Nagendra & Others AND Chandrakant Jain & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 220

ABC AND XYZ. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 221

The Branch Manager AND Sarojamma & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 222

Sayes Khalil Ulla Hussaini AND Chief Election Commission of India & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 223.

Samiulla Saheb & ANR AND Mohammed Sameer. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 224

Judgments/Orders

Karnataka HC Quashes FIR Against Liquor Company Accused Of Parking Trucks Loaded With Liquor Bottles In Its Premises During Operation Of Model Code Of Conduct

Case Title: Kalpatharu Breweries And Distilleries Pvt Ltd AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 12274 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 218

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered under the Karnataka Excise Act against Kalpatharu Breweries and Distilleries Pvt Ltd who allegedly during the Lok Sabha Election 2024, when the Election Code of Conduct was in force, parked trucks loaded with liquor in the company premises.

A single judge bench of Justice M G Uma allowed the petition and said “Even if the first information is accepted as it is in the light of the invoice and the permit produced by the petitioner, no offence either under Section 32 or under Section 34 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 is made out.”

Claimant Can't Seek Compensation From Offending Vehicle's Insurer If Already Received From Own Insurance Company: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Kumarvel Janakiram AND National Insurance Company LTD & Others

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5788 OF 2013

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 219

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that if the claimant has received the amount in full and final settlement of his claim from the insurance company of his vehicle, he cannot claim further payment towards repair of his vehicle from the Insurance Company of the offending vehicle.

A single judge bench of Justice Jyoti Mulimani made the observation while dismissing the petition filed by one Kumarvel Janakiram. It said, “Admittedly, damaged vehicle was insured with the Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company and the claimant has received the full and final settlement of his claim without any reservation or demur. In the absence of any material to show that the claim paid by his Insurance Company represented a part only of the total damage, the Tribunal is justified in rejecting the claim for any further payment.”

Karnataka High Court Upholds Order For Specific Performance Of Sale Agreement, Says If Owner Intended To Avail Loan It Would Execute Mortgage Deed

Case Title: Nagendra & Others AND Chandrakant Jain & ANR

Case No: REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100383 OF 2017

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 220

The Karnataka High Court has upheld an order of the trial court decreeing a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement in favour of the plaintiff and rejected the contention of the defendants who are businessmen that they had availed loan from the plaintiffs and had not agreed to sell the schedule property.

A division bench of Justice E S Indiresh and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar dismissed the appeal filed by Nagendra and others and said, “If at all the defendants are of the view that, they have availed loan from the plaintiffs and have not entered into sale agreement and if such being the case, there was no impediment for the defendants to execute the mortgage deed instead of executing a sale agreement and therefore, the finding recorded by the trial Court is just and proper.”

Wife's Appeal Challenging Divorce Decree Does Not Stand Abated On Husband's Death: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC AND XYZ

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4677 OF 2016

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 221

The Karnataka High Court recently held that an appeal filed by a wife challenging the divorce decree granted in favour of the husband by the family court does not stand abated on the husband dying pending hearing of appeal.

A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde allowed the appeal filed by a woman and set aside order of the family court granting divorce on grounds of cruelty on the petition filed by the husband.

Karnataka High Court Declines Insurance Company's Plea Alleging Claimant Committed Fraud In Connivance With Insured Lawyer To Secure Compensation

Case Title: The Branch Manager AND Sarojamma & ANR

Case No: MFA NO. 7795 OF 2013

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 222

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by an insurance company challenging an order passed by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal claiming that fraud was played by the claimant for the sake of compensation by claiming that advocate Rajappa K S, riding the motorcycle, had knocked her down causing injuries.

A Single Bench of Justice T G Shivashakare Gowda said the insurance company failed to prove MLC report as per which the injuries were a result of self-fall. It said,"On perusal of it nothing is mentioned as such that the petitioner has suffered injuries due to self-fall while triple-riding. When the Insurance Company relies on Ex.R3, it is required to prove the said document through proper evidence. The entry refers to the name of Dr. Manjula who is the Medical Officer of Primary Health Centre, Anandapura. The contents of Ex.R3 required to be proved through Dr. Manjula. No efforts are made to secure her presence. Who gave the information and who brought the injured to the hospital are not forthcoming. Under such circumstances, it is unsafe to rely upon Ex.R3 which was not even confronted to the petitioner during the course of her cross-examination. Mere production of such a document through the Officer of the Insurance Company is not enough to prove its genuineness.”

Free Bus Service Cannot Be Provided To Enable Voters To Reach Polling Booth: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sayes Khalil Ulla Hussaini AND Chief Election Commission of India & Others

Case No: WP 13045/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 223.

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday disposed of a public interest litigation filed seeking directions to the Chief Electoral Officer officer to provide free bus services to transport voters on polling dates to enable them to vote.

A vacation bench of Justice R Devdas and Justice J M Khazi said, “If such directions are issued either by the state government or head of the public transport department it would violate express provisions contained in the statute, allegations can also be made against the political party which is running the government that such directions would run counter to express provisions. The Chief Election Commissioner is not empowered to issue such directions either to the state government or the heads of the Public Transport Corporation.”

Custody Application Of Minor Can Only Be Filed Before Court Having Jurisdiction Where Child Ordinarily Resides: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Samiulla Saheb & ANR AND Mohammed Sameer

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.6789 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 224

The Karnataka High Court recently held that an application seeking custody of a minor child has to be filed only before a court where the minor child ordinarily resides.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by the grandparents Samiulla Saheb and another of the minor child and set aside the order of the trial court rejecting their application filed under Order VII Rule, 10 a/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to return the plaint filed by the father of the minor child.