Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 21 To July 27, 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 241 to 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 250Nominal Index: M/s Banavathy & Company AND Mahaveer Electro Mech (P) Ltd & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 241Vishwas K S AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 242Jagadish Devdas Anchan AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 243Century Club AND S Umapathy & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 244M D Devamma AND K V Kalavathi & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 245Mustafa & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 246State of Karnataka AND Nagesh. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 247M/s Muni Naga Reddy HUF v. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 248Google India Pvt. Ltd vs Nayana Krishna. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 249M/s Alstom Transport India Limited v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 250Judgments/Orders[S.138 NI Act] Trial Court Shall Order Payment Of Future Interest On Compensation Amount To Protect Complainant: Karnataka HCCase Title: M/s Banavathy & Company AND Mahaveer Electro Mech (P) Ltd & OthersCase No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No. 996 OF 2016Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 241The Karnataka High Court has said that trial courts, while passing an order of sentence in cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, after determining the fine/compensation, shall also pass orders to pay future interest on the compensation amount payable to the complainant, so that even if the matter is challenged, the complainant will be protected.Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar said, “In view of Section 143(3) the trial for offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act has to be completed within six months. If the said provision is not adhered to and the trial for the offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act takes 4 to 5 years, in the mean time, the claim of the complainant for recovery of the cheque amount by filing civil suit becomes barred by limitation...Not only that the accused who is convicted for offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act challenges the same before the Sessions Court wherein the matter takes 2 to 3 years. The accused unsuccessful in the said appeal prefers revision petition before the High Court and it is seen that the disposal of revision takes more than 5 years. After all this, if the complainant has to receive the fine/compensation as awarded by the trial Court, if it is a cheque amount or little higher than the cheque amount, he will be at loss and put to injustice.”'All Sports Are Equal': Karnataka High Court Slams State For Withholding Para-Swimmer's Cash Award, Imposes ₹2Lakh Cost On OfficialsCase Title: Vishwas K S AND State of Karnataka & OthersCase No: WRIT PETITION No.20895 OF 2023Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 242"All sports are equal; the sportspersons of all sports are also equal; the effort they put is equal, it is unfortunate that the State pampers only a few sports and leaves the other sportsmen in the lurch," said the Karnataka High Court while directing the State to release over Rs 1 Lakh to a para-swimmer who was denied cash awards.Justice M Nagaprasanna in his order passed on Monday (July 21) allowed a petition filed by Para athletics swimmer, Vishwas K S–who lost both his arms at a tender age–who had approached the court after his several representations to secure cash incentive from the state were not acted upon.'Systemic Fraud' Involving Public Servants: Karnataka High Court Denies Relief To Hotelier Accused Of Forging Aadhar To Usurp Vacant LandsCase Title: Jagadish Devdas Anchan AND State of Karnataka & ANRCase No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.4470 OF 2025 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.8628 OF 2024Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 243Refusing to quash a cheating case against a hotelier and kitchen steward accused of creating fake Aadhar Cards and usurping vacant properties in Mangalore in connivance with officials of the sub-registrar office, the Karnataka High Court expressed its concern at the involvement of public servants remarking it was a cause of public concern.While dismissing the petitions filed by Jagadish Devdas Anchan and Nityanand Kundar Justice M Nagaprasanna in his order said: "Diving back to the facts of this case, this Court is aghast at the audacity of the attempt. The connivance of public servants in facilitating the crime, if proven, renders the matter one not of private grievance, but of public concern. The civil suit, pending though it may be, cannot eclipse the penal consequences, of what appears to be a serious offence, as the narrative in the case at hand unfolds not merely a tale of civil discord, but a systematic and deliberate fraud having all hues of a crime. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to observe that there cannot be foreclosure of investigation, in a case where a criminal enterprise is disguised as land transaction. The machinery of law must not be paralyzed in the face of carefully orchestrated deception. It, in fact, has all the hues and shades of a thrilling potboiler. These are matters which would require an investigation, in the least"Bengaluru's Century...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 21 To July 27, 2025

Mustafa Plumber

Tags