Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: March 4 - March 10, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 108 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 118

Nominal Index:

Hemachandra M Kuppalli AND M/s R.B.Green Field & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 108

The Karnataka Power Corporation Limited & ANR AND K.N. Ningegowda & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 109

ABC AND XYZ. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 110

Arunkumar R & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 111

Umashankara C & Others AND Registrar General & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 112

XXX AND The Registrar General & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 113

Registered Unaided Private Schools Management Association & Another AND State of Karnataka & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 114

Dhanayya & Others AND Chandrashekhar. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 115

Jayapal K M AND The Management of Shakti Precision Components (India) Limited. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 116

C Girish Naik & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 117

Razorpay Software Private Limited AND Union of India. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 118

Judgments/Orders

NI Act | Deviation From Terms Of Settlement Arrived At During Appellate Stage To Result In Restoration Of Conviction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Hemachandra M Kuppalli AND M/s R.B.Green Field & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.12169 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 108

The Karnataka High Court has directed that when a convict under the Negotiable Instruments Act offers himself for settlement of the dispute in appeal on the basis of which conviction is set aside, Courts shall mandatorily observe that deviation from the terms of compromise will automatically result in restoration of conviction order.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “Failing which, the accused who get away with conviction on compromise like in the case at hand, take advantage of the laborious rigmarole of procedure of getting the compromise decree executed.”

Claim For Workmen's Regularisation Doesn't Depend On Appointment Order, But Actual Work Done For Corporation: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Karnataka Power Corporation Limited & ANR AND K.N. Ningegowda & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 75671 OF 2013

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 109

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) questioning the order of the Industrial Tribunal directing the regularisation of 13 workmen.

A single judge bench of Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde confirmed the order dated 30.06.2012 passed by the Tribunal and directed that since the demand for regularisation was pending for close to 20 years, the petitioner Corporation shall take steps to regularise the workmen in terms of the directions issued by the Industrial Tribunal.

It said: The claim is not dependent on appointment orders but is based on the actual work done for the Corporation. If the appointment orders are not issued and in the grab of contract labourers (which claim is not established for the reasons recorded supra), and the respondents are made to work since 1991-93 till 2007 and beyond, then the fault lies with the petitioner Corporation in not issuing the appointment orders.

Can't Let Husband Create 'Artificial Deductions' From Salary To Grant Less Maintenance To Wife: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC AND XYZ

Case No: REV. PETITION FAMILY COURT NO.233 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 110

The Karnataka High Court has held that extra deductions from the salary of husband like provident fund contribution, house rent recovery, furniture recovery, etc., cannot be made deductible while considering for assessment of maintenance amount to be granted to the estranged wife.

A single judge bench of Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar dismissed the petition filed by a husband questioning the order of the family court granting maintenance of Rs.15,000 to his wife and Rs.10,000 to his daughter under section 125 CrPC. It said, “What are the compulsorily amounts to be deducted are income tax and professional tax...Considering deductions from the salary of petitioner/husband, those are provident fund contribution, house rent recovery, furniture recovery, towards loan obtained by the petitioner/husband, LIC premium and festival advance, these are all deductions accruing to the benefit of petitioner only. These amounts cannot be made deductible while considering for assessment of maintenance amount.”

Apartment Complex With Only Residential Flats To Be Registered Under Apartment Ownership Act Not Cooperative Societies Act: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Arunkumar R & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 25528 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 111

The Karnataka High Court has held that to manage and maintain an apartment complex consisting of only residential flats, the association of owners has to be registered under the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972, and not under the provision of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959.

A single judge bench of Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde said “Admittedly, the project referred to above is a residential housing project. There is no commercial unit in the said project. The sale deeds executed in favour of the purchasers of the flats would also indicate that the purchasers have undertaken to subject them to the provisions of the Act of 1972. There is no difficulty in holding that petitioners and members of the proposed respondent No.4 Society are entitled to have registration of an association under the Act of 1972, and there cannot be any association registered under the Act of 1959 to form a society to manage and maintain the Property comprising only residential flats.”

Junior Court Officer Should Not Be Permitted To Draw Higher Pay Scale To That Of Seniors In Solitary Cadre: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Umashankara C & Others AND Registrar General & ANR

Case No: Writ Petition No 2851 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 112

The Karnataka High Court recently directed the Registrar General of the Court to reconsider the representation made by 12 Court officers, seeking to cure anomaly in their pay scale with regards to Section 6(b) of the High Court of Karnataka (Officers and Officials) Revised Pay Rules, 2018.

A single judge bench of Chief Justice P S Dinesh Kumar (now retired) allowed in part the petition filed by Umashankara C and other and said, “The issue requires to be reconsidered by the 1st respondent, in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court, which clearly depicts that the junior should not be permitted to draw a higher pay scale to that of the seniors in a solitary cadre.”

Accused Who Has Been Acquitted/Discharged Has Right To Live With Dignity: Karnataka HC Directs For Party's Name To Be Masked In Court's Digital Records

Case Title: XXX AND The Registrar General & Others

Case N0: Writ Petition No 25557 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 113

The Karnataka High Court while directing the registry to mask the name of an accused in the cause title of the case found in the records of the court has observed that “even an accused who has been discharged or acquitted honourably by a competent Court of law has a right to live with dignity.”

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said that Article 21 of the Constitution of India mandates that no person shall be deprived of his life or liberty except in accordance with law.

High Court Quashes Govt Order Appointing Karnataka School Examination & Assessment Board To Hold Annual School Exams

Case Title: Registered Unaided Private Schools Management Association & Another AND State of Karnataka & Ors

Case No: WP 26489/2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 114

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the notifications issued by the State Government appointing the KSEAB (Karnataka School Examination & Assessment Board) as the competent authority to conduct the Summative Assessment-2 exams for students of classes 5th, 8th, and 9th and the annual examination for class 11th, studying in government, aided and unaided schools and colleges, following the Karnataka State Board Syllabus.

The examination was to commence from March 9.

A single judge bench of Justice Ravi V Hosmani said “When Government intends to bring changes to examination system affecting such large number of students, it would be desirable as well as mandatory to follow democratic procedure stipulated. And in case of failure, there need be no further justification to set such faulty measures at naught, regardless of merit policy and object behind such measures.”

[Order XLI Rule 17 CPC] Appeal Cannot Be Dismissed On Merits Merely Due To Non-Appearance Of Appellant: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dhanayya & Others AND Chandrashekhar

Case No: R.S.A 200252 OF 2017

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 115

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that if the appellant does not appear when the appeal is called for hearing it can only be dismissed for non-prosecution and not on merits.

A single judge bench of Justice G Basavaraja allowed the appeal filed by Dhanayya (since deceased) and his legal heirs questioning the judgment and decree dated 04.03.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Afzalpur, by which it dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants and confirmed the judgment and decree dated 02.04.2014 passed by the trial court.

Workman Using Abusive Language Can't Be Treated Lightly, Punishment Of Dismissal Not Disproportionate: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Jayapal K M AND The Management of Shakti Precision Components (India) Limited

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.149 OF 2022 (L-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.52533 OF 2019

Citation No; 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 116

The Karnataka High Court has held that the act of a workman using abusive language not once, but on several occasions cannot be treated lightly and the imposition of punishment by way of dismissal in such a case cannot be held to be disproportionate.

A single judge bench of Justice K S Hemalekha made the observation while allowing the petition filed by the Management of Shakti Precision Components (India) Limited. It set aside the order passed by Labour court directing the company to reinstate the workman Jaypal KM.

State Human Rights Commission Can Only Recommend And Not Direct State Govt For Action Against Policemen: Karnataka High Court Reiterates

Case Title: C Girish Naik & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 7893 OF 2020

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 117

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that the State Human Rights Commission can only recommend and not pass directions to the Government to act against policemen.

A Division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice CM Poonacha partly allowed the petition filed by C Girish Naik who works as Inspector of Police and said “The report dated 12.3.2020 issued by the fourth respondent [Karnataka State Human Rights Commission] shall not be treated as a direction but as a recommendation.”

'No Intention': Karnataka HC Quashes PMLA Case Against Payment Gateway App Over Commission Earned From Illegal Business Of Another Entity

Case Title: Razorpay Software Private Limited AND Union of India

Case No: Writ Petition No 10329 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 118

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the offences of Money laundering initiated against payment gateway company Razorpay, accused of being negligent in setting up the merchant IDs in the name of a co-accused who was involved in illegal money lending business.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by the company and quashed the proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate under Sections 3, 70 and 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the summons issued against it by the Special court.