KAHC010521472015_1...
The plaintiff, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, engaged in developing resorts and health clubs, entered into an agreement to purchase suit lands from the first defendant on 17.2.200...
Karnataka High Court
Sort by:
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Mandamus for Water Release from Narayanapur Dam for Irrigation. Court holds that decisions of an Irrigation Advisory Committee are recommendatory and not binding on the State, and that mandamus cannot issue to compel implementation of such recommendations....
The petitioners, four farmers from Yadgir district, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents (State of Karnata...
- 94
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Appeals Against Land Acquisition for Sir M. Visveswaraya Layout; Upholds Single Judge's Order. The appeals challenged acquisition notifications under Sections 17(1) and 19(1) of the BDA Act, 1976, alleging arbitrary exclusion and violation of constitutional rights....
This matter concerns four writ appeals filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, challenging a common order dated June 6, 2006, of a learned Single Judge. The appeals arise from lan...
- 99
High Court
- 78
High Court
Karnataka High Court Considers BDA's Appeal Against Quashing of Land Acquisition Notifications Under Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976. Case Involves Dispute Over Inclusion of 5 Acres Not in Preliminary Notification and Offer of 40% Developed Land as Compensation....
The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) initiated acquisition proceedings for 4,043 acres 27 guntas of land to form the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout. Following a resolution on 3 September 2007 and s...
- 29
High Court
KAHC020183482022_1...
The appellant was convicted by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ballari for offences under Sections 498A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for allegedly causing the dowry death of h...
- 57
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeals by Police Officers and Complainant in FIR Quash Case — Sets Aside Single Judge Order Restoring Investigation. Court holds that inherent power to quash FIR under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised sparingly and only to prevent abuse of process, not to conduct a mini-trial....
The case involves two writ appeals arising from a common order of a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court dated 30.03.2022 in Writ Petition No.12787/2021, whereby the Single Judge quashed t...
- 99
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revision Petition in Cheque Dishonour Case — Conviction and Sentence Upheld. Accused's defence of loan repayment and signature denial rejected due to lack of evidence and admission of signature....
The petitioner, Narasimhan, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in C.C.No.26147/2016 vide judgment ...
- 64
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal by Complainant Mother Against Acquittal in POCSO Case — Trial Court Erred in Disbelieving Victim's Testimony; Conviction Restored Under Sections 363, 376, 506 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. The court held that the victim's testimony in sexual offences is sufficient for conviction if found trustworthy, and the trial court failed to apply the statutory presumption under the POCSO Act....
The appellant, Smt. Rajavva, the mother of the victim, filed an appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 20.06.2022 passed by the II Additional ...
- 34
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal by Complainant in POCSO Case — Acquittal of Accused Set Aside for Non-Examination of Material Witness. Failure to examine the victim's mother, who was the first informant and material witness, vitiates the trial and renders the acquittal unsustainable under Section 372 Cr.P.C....
The appellant, Smt. Rajavva, the mother of the victim and the complainant, filed a criminal appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 2...
- 92
