- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Karnataka High Court Weekly...
Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up : January 17 to 23
Mustafa Plumber
23 Jan 2022 2:58 PM GMT
1: The Marriage Is Totally Dead': KarnatakaHigh Court Grants Divorce To Couple Living Separately Since 21 Yrs Case Title: K Mallikarjuna v. H A Sudha Mallikarjuna Case No: Miscellaneous First Appeal 4314/2012. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 15Observing that "the marriage is totally dead" and that nothing would be gained by trying to keep the parties tied forever to a marriage that...
Case Title: K Mallikarjuna v. H A Sudha Mallikarjuna Case No: Miscellaneous First Appeal 4314/2012. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 15
Observing that "the marriage is totally dead" and that nothing would be gained by trying to keep the parties tied forever to a marriage that in fact has ceased to exist, the Karnataka High Court recently granted divorce to a couple who lived separately for a period of 21 years. A division bench of Justice B Veerapa and Justice K S Hemalekha said, "Once the parties have separated and the separation has continued for a sufficient length of time of more than 21 years and one of them presented a petition for divorce, it can well be presumed that the marriage has broken down."Case Title: Dr Ganesh Nayak v. V Shamanna Case No: Writ Petition No.21688 oF 2009 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 16
The Karnataka High Court has suggested that medical professionals should be protected from legal action just like public servants are protected against bonafide errors in their action. Justice Krishna S Dixit expressed that more often than not, the cases of medical negligence are launched recklessly by the patients and their relatives. The court said "Compensation culture'' which obtains in other jurisdictions is gradually gaining entry to the field of medical services in our society affecting a healthy relationship of doctor & patient.
Case Title: Parvathamma v. The Principal Chief Conservator Of Forests Case No: Writ Petition No.8730 of 2016 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 17
The Karnataka High Court recently observed that Payment of Wages Act is a beneficial piece of enactment. The workmen cannot be denied the legal entitlement by applying technicalities while adjudicating the claim application. Justice Jyoti Mulimani thus quashed the order dated January 28, 2015 passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner rejecting the claim petition filed by one Parvathamma, who worked as a watcher with the Department of Forest and Environment Department, merely because her signature was missing on the claim application.
Case Title: Suresh v. D Ramesh Case No: M.F.A. No.8030/2016 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 18
Observing that the amount awarded to the parents is the compensation for loss of love, affection, care and companionship of the deceased child, the Karnataka High Court recently enhanced the compensation granted by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (MACT) to a couple who lost their 2-year old daughter in an accident. Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar modified the order dated August 16, 2016, by which MACT had awarded a compensation of Rs 3.50 lakh to the petitioners.
5: Borrower Can't Claim Loan MoratoriumAs A Right Based On RBI's Circular Of March 2020 : Karnataka High CourtCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 19.
The Karnataka High Court recently set aside the directions issued to Reserve Bank of India by a single judge bench of the High Court directing it to monitor the implementation of Covid-19 package announced on March 27, 20202, by which RBI had allowed Banks to declare a three-month moratorium on all term loans, outstanding as on March 1, 2020. The High Court also held that the RBI's circular was a guideline and cannot be construed as a mandatory requirement, creating a right in favour of a borrower to avail loan moratorium.
Case Title: Yashihirao Horinouchi v. The Deputy Director Of Factories Case No: Writ Petition No.11451 OF 2018 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 20
The Karnataka High Court recently held that non-arraigning of the Company as an accused would not vitiate the proceedings initiated under the Factories Act, against the occupier of the factory.Justice M. Nagaprasanna in its order dated December 6, 2021 observed, "Section 2(n) of the Factories Act and its proviso makes it clear that one of the Directors of the company would be responsible for proper implementation of the provisions of the Act. This ensures that more care is taken for the maintenance of the factory and various safety measures prescribed under the Act, so that the health, welfare and safety of the workers are not neglected. It is the occupier who would become responsible for all such acts of a factory."
Case Title: Abrar Kazi v. State of Karnataka Case No: Crl.P.No.2929/2020 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 21
The Karnataka High Court has said that cricket match fixing does not amount to the offence of cheating and therefore the offence under Section 420 IPC cannot be invoked against the alleged offenders. A single judge bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar said, "It is true that if a player indulges in match fixing, a general feeling will arise that he has cheated the lovers of the game. But, this general feeling does not give rise to an offence".Case Title: Lalitha v. State of Karnataka Case No: Criminal Petition NO.7143/2021, Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 22
The Karnataka High Court has set aside the order granting bail to a lecturer, accused of sexually assaulting a minor student of his college, as the trial court failed to given an opportunity to the complainant/victim of being heard before passing the order. Justice H P Sandesh set aside the order dated August 10, 2021 granting bail to Gururaj L, and directed that the accused be arrested and commit him to custody under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C.Case Title: High Court Of Karnataka v. The State Of Karnataka Case No: WP 14925 of 2020, Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 23
The Karnataka High Court on Friday closed its suo moto case, registered for ensuring that elections are conducted to the Corporations/Municipalities in the State in order to comply with the mandate of Article 243-U(3) of the Constitution. The development ensued after the State Election Commission informed the Court that all the elections to the Local Bodies and the Municipalities in the State have been completed by 30.12.2021, except the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and Vijayapura Municipal Corporation regarding whom the matter is pending before the Apex Court.Other reports:
Case Title: BEML Staff Association v. Union of India Case No: WP 20258/2021
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Union of India and BEML Limited directing them to file their statement of objections by February 10, on a petition filed questioning the decision of the government to privatise the public sector undertaking. A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Suraj Govindaraj issued the notice while hearing a petition filed by BEML Staff Association and three other Unions of the undertaking.Case Title : Yamuna and another versus The State; Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 24
The Karnataka High Court has held that if persons not belonging to the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe obtains a false caste certificate, they cannot be prosecuted under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
