Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: April 01 - April 07, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 157 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 168

Nominal Index:

Syed Mohammed Hussain AND The Karnataka State Board of AUQAF & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 157

Fr. Valerian Fernandes AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 158

The Managing Director Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Others and L Mallikarjunappa. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 159

K C Cariappa AND Union of India & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 160

Parvathamma And The Joint Director. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 161

Shabnam Parveen Ahmad & ANR AND NIL. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 162

Jagan Chandy AND Jagadish K A. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 163

Varun Chopra & ANR AND Shyam Sunder Chopra. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 164

C Kempanna AND Munichannarayappa & others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 165

Srinivas S N AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 166

T.Y. Subramani vs Divisional Controller, K.S.R.T.C. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 167

Smt. K. C. Nagalambike and Ors. v. The Managing Director KSRTC & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 168

Judgments/Orders

Revision Petition Challenging Order Of Waqf Board Is To Be Made In 90 Days As Per High Court Rules: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Syed Mohammed Hussain AND The Karnataka State Board of AUQAF & Others

Case No: Civil Revision Petition No .200099 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 157

The Karnataka High Court has held that though there is no specific period fixed for preferring the Revision petition under the Waqf Act, 1995 however, as per provisions of the High Court of Karnataka Rules, 1959, petitions to revise the order or proceedings of any court shall be presented to the High Court within a period of ninety days from the date of the order.

A single judge bench of Justice G Basavaraja thus dismissed a petition filed by one Syed Mohammed Hussain who had filed the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking to condone delay of 593 days in filing this Revision Petition in assailing the order dated 17th August, 2019 passed by the Presiding Officer, Karnataka Waqf Tribunal, Kalaburagi.

Law Book Publishers Who Print Statutes Should Be Extra Cautious, Any Mistakes May Invite Contempt Or Perjury Proceedings: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Fr. Valerian Fernandes AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 1561 OF 2023

Citation N0: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 158

The Karnataka High Court has said that those who print & publish statutes and statutory instruments should be extra cautious or else, they run the risk of being hauled up for contempt of court, perjury & the like offences in addition to being black-listed from public tenders for the supply of books of their publication.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit made the observation while hearing an appeal filed by Fr. Valerian Fernandes questioned the order of the single judge bench which dismissed his petition seeking a mandamus to the respondents to grant the subject land by issuing Grant Certificate/Saguvali Chit.

Pensioners Are In The Evening Of Life After Long & Spotless Service, Welfare State Expected To Treat Them With Soft Gloves: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Managing Director Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Others and L Mallikarjunappa

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 133/2024 (S-R) C/W WRIT APPEAL NOs. 140/2024 (S-RES), 46/2024(S-RES), 1551/ 2023 (S-RES), 1546/2023 (S-RES), 1545/2023 (S-RES), 1532/2023 (S-RES), 1531/2023 (S-R), 1523/2023 (S-R), 1518/2023 (S-RES), 1431/2023 (S-RES), 136/2024 (S-RES)

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 159

The Karnataka High Court has said that Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) being a cent per cent public sector undertaking of the Government of Karnataka, falls within the definition of 'State' under Article 12, and an employer in a Welfare State is expected to treat pensioners with soft gloves since they are in the evening of life, having retired after putting in a long & spotless service during their productive years.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed an appeal filed by the Corporation challenging the order of the single judge bench which directed it to re-fix the salary of the petitioners by granting them the additional annual increment, and consequently, also refit and pay their pension along with the arrears of salary and pension accrued

Karnataka HC Lauds Efforts Of MEA, DSG In Granting Visa Clearance To State-Level Cricketer Within 60 Minutes Of Police Clearance To Allow Him To Travel To England

Case Title: K C Cariappa AND Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 8599 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 160

The Karnataka High Court has appreciated the efforts of the Ministry of External Affairs, to clear the file pending before the Regional Passport Office (Bengaluru) within 60 minutes which facilitated the travel of Karnataka State Cricket team player to England to play cricket.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while disposing of the petition filed by cricketer K C Cariappa said “The efforts of the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, Sri.Shanthi Bhushan H., in keeping up to his assurance merits appreciation. So thus, the Ministry of External Affairs and the second respondent, all for disposal of a file within 60 minutes. This action of the Union of India deserves emulation.”

Stigma Of Ex-Parte Divorce Can't Hang Over Head Of Widow To Deny Her Benefits Of Being Spouse Of Ex-Serviceman: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Parvathamma And The Joint Director

Case No: Writ Petition No 416 of 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 161

The Karnataka High Court has held that a spouse of an ex-serviceman cannot be denied a grant of a widow identity card on the ground that an ex-parte decree of divorce against the wife was granted on a plea by the husband who passed away during the pendency of the application seeking recall of the ex-parte decree.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Parvathamma and directed the Joint Director, Sainik Welfare and Resettlement to issue the petitioner a widow identity card, within two weeks. She is entitled to all consequential benefits that would flow from the grant of the identity card.

Couple Entering Into 'Mubarat' Agreement Is Entitled To Declaration Of Dissolution Of Marriage By Family Court: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Shabnam Parveen Ahmad & ANR AND NIL

Case NO: MFA 4711 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 162

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that when the parties (Sunni Muslims) have entered into a Mubarat agreement and have decided to dissolve the marriage entered into between them by the said agreement, the Family Court is empowered to consider the application for divorce by mutual consent.

A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde allowed the appeal filed by the couple and dissolved the marriage between the parties accepting the Mubarat agreement.

Delay In Taking Cognizance Of Private Complaint Without Malafides By Complainant To Be Excluded From Limitation Period: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Jagan Chandy AND Jagadish K A

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1987 OF 2017

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 163

The Karnataka High Court has held that the delay caused in taking cognizance by the magistrate court after a private complaint is filed when there is no malafide on part of the complainant is required to be excluded for the purpose of the computation of the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

A single-judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj dismissed a petition filed by one Jagan Chandy seeking to quash proceedings initiated against him under section 499 IPC by Jagadish K A.

Bengaluru Court Can Try Trademarks Suit If Parties Not Residing Within Its Territory But Cause Of Action Has Arisen There: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Varun Chopra & ANR AND Shyam Sunder Chopra

Case No: REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1735 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 164

The Karnataka High Court has held that a court in Bengaluru has the jurisdiction to try a suit instituted under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, where the cause of action has arisen in Bengaluru, even if the plaintiff or the defendant is not residing in the said place.

A single judge bench of Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde allowed the appeal filed by Varun Chopra and another and set aside the order of the trial court which had rejected the suit on the ground that none of the parties is having any branch office within the territorial jurisdiction of the City Civil Court, Bengaluru where the suit is instituted. It restored the suit back on the file of the trial court.

Specific Relief Can Be Granted If 'Karta' Enters Agreement Without Joint Owners For Benefit Of Joint Family, To Clear Loan Availed By Them: Karnataka HC

Case Title: C Kempanna AND Munichannarayappa & others

Case No: R.S.A.NO.1102/2008

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 165

The Karnataka High Court has held that relief of specific performance can be granted against a defendant who is the Karta of the family when the other members of the joint family are not included in the sale agreement if the sale consideration is used for benefit of the joint family and for clearing the loan availed by joint owners.

A single judge bench of Justice H P Sandesh dismissed an appeal filed by C Kempanna challenging the order of the trial court and the first appellate court allowing the suit filed by the plaintiff.

[S.38 Arms Act] All Offences Under Arms Act Are Cognizable Offences: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Srinivas S N AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1858 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 166

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by an accused seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him under Section 30 of the Arms Act, 1959. Petitioner-accused contended that a coordinate bench of the Court had ruled that offences under Sections 30 and 35 of the Arms Act were non-cognizable.

In dismissing the plea, a single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajith Shetty held, "[On that occasion] Section 38 of the ARMS Act was not brought to the notice of this Court and therefore, the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.4567/2018, wherein, this Court has held that the offence under Sections 30 and 35 of the Act are non-cognizable offences is per incuriam.”

Fake Transfer Certificate, Fraudulent Practice Would Not Get Sanctity By Passage Of Time: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: T.Y. Subramani vs Divisional Controller, K.S.R.T.C.

Case No. : Civil Writ Petition No. 42748/2014 (L-KSRTC)

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 167

A single judge bench of the Karnataka High Court comprising of Justice K.S. Hemalekha while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of T.Y. Subramani vs Divisional Controller, K.S.R.T.C. has held that by mere passage of time, a fraudulent practice would not get any sanctity, and equity jurisdiction cannot be exercised in such cases as a person who seeks equity must act in a fair and equitable manner.

Compassionate Appointment Cannot Be Sought As A Matter Of Right And To A Particular Post: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Smt. K. C. Nagalambike and Ors. v. The Managing Director KSRTC & Ors

Case No. W.P. No. 29984/2019

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 168

A single-judge bench of the Karnataka High Court comprising of Justice S.G. Pandit while deciding a writ petition in the case of Smt. K. C. Nagalambike and Ors. v. The Managing Director KSRTC & Ors. has held that compassionate appointment cannot be sought as a matter of right and at the same time compassionate appointment cannot be sought against a particular post.