Nadeem Ahammad Abdul Razak Mulla vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 October, 2023
ACCUSED
IN C.C.NO.1441/2021, IN BHATKAL ROR CASE NO.29/2021,
FIR NO.22549/2020-21, FOR THE OFFENCES
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 1641 (1.31 seconds)Sri Puttaraju D vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 December, 2023
MARUTHI OMNI) SEIZED
ON CONNECTION WITH CASE ROR NO.12/2022-23 PENDING IN
FOC.NO.12/2022 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE ... proper
panchnama to keep such articles in a bank locker.
In any case, such articles should be produced
before the Magistrate within a week
Sanganagouda Lachamannagouda ... vs The State Of Karnataka & Ors on 25 August, 2014
ANNEXURE-F, CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED
24.08.2004 PASSED IN CASE
NO.:REV/ROR/MUT/62/2003, THE CERTIFIED COPY OF
WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE ... passed by respondent
-4-
No.3 - Assistant Commissioner, Yadgiri, in case
No.REV/ROR/MUT/62/2003-04, is confirmed.
2. The brief facts leading
Sri Sushil Kumar vs M/S Karnataka Maharashtra on 14 December, 2010
directing the advance amount
with interefist. does not introduce
any new case 'ror[--a Ara_ew"'cause of action. The proposed ... orde?siV_ CPC (Amended) is not attracted to the
'x__instant= case. The bar of limitation, if any, can be made
Sri. Ramappa @ Ramesh S/O. Dharmanna ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 June, 2021
SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO
THE PETITION ER IN BANAHA TTI ROR CRIM E
NO.33/ 2020-21 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE ... case of the prosecution that
Forest Officials registered a case in ROR
No.33/2020-21 on 19.11.2020 for the offences
3
punishable under Sections
Sri M V Subramanya vs State Of Karnataka on 10 October, 2025
according to DW1 was a created document. Said evidence
supported plaintiffs' case. Contrary to it, both Courts
erroneously held TMC was in possession, which ... suit properties from DC. Such being case,
change of entries in columns no.9 and 12 of RoRs in respect of
suit properties would
Sri Karethimmaiah @ Thimmaiah vs Sri H Muddahanumaiah on 27 March, 2023
permanent
injunction. To establish his case, plaintiff had examined himself
and got marked Will, two RoRs, order passed by Assistant
Commissioner and land revenue paid ... Thimmaiah' in column no.12(2) of RoR was consistent with
case of defendant. Absence of plaintiff's name in RoR was
unbridgeable
Gangamma W/O Siddapura Pakkirappa vs The Deputy Commissioner on 8 December, 2023
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G THEREBY
CONFIRM THE ORDER DATED 16.01.2021 IN ROR DISPUTE CASE IS
NO.KAM/VIVAD/50/20-21 PASSED BY RESPONDENT
Smt Vinodamma vs Union Of India on 15 March, 2010
also perused the
-- inipugned order as well as the record of this case.
"5... The learned counsel for the appellants submitted
_ that the view ... paSseliper, MoS PMiinteryvai as te
ror which train he tell down so-lone os the case falls
Withuly ive vanibi of Seetlon f24-A Carel
M/S Es-N-Es Trade Links, vs Mr B Balasubramanya on 17 September, 2010
vacant
/'
t9
possession to the landlord, as held in the case of SHYAM
CHARAN vs. SHEOJI BHAI AND ANOTHER, repQrtg ... Apex Court in the case of (P) 'V
LIMITED vs. FEEDERAL' !vg_io*roRs-'{ié)V'Vi'L1_M1TfiD