{"id":156806,"date":"2010-09-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2"},"modified":"2017-12-14T15:11:12","modified_gmt":"2017-12-14T09:41:12","slug":"m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2","title":{"rendered":"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF XARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS ma 9*\" DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019\n\nBEFORE :\n\nTHE HON'BE.E MRJUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAn(gE!\u00a7t<i\\\nQRIMINAL APPEAL No.158\u00a7g2oo7_,j?   A\n\nBggwgen :   \n\nM.MaIiesh\n\nS\/o Malia,\n\nAged about 40 years,\n\nC\/0 Chandrappa Compound\n\n7"' Cross, 4"' B Biock,\n\nMestripalya,\n\nKoramanagaia, "      _\nBangaiore ~--56O O34. "   i'  ;;~..Ap--peffant\n\n( By Sri,M-,AM_,.iFio_Vor{a:;_ha &,'js;}\u00a7' E%.'u\\E-..K.ri'shnappa,\nAdvocate ) _  'I. .  .\n\nAnd :\n\n__Dr.D.C.i\u00ab,Ramegowda.,_ A\n 'S,fo Late Channakeshavaraya Gowda,\n\n'=_Aged..abo,ut\u00ab.?-Q 'years,\nNo 'S?""'Cross,_ \n\n:6"? Main, IAS Coiony,\n\n. BTM I_I stage,'  '\n\n--Banga'I'ore*-.566 O78. .. Respondent<\/pre>\n
,   By\u00bb.$ri vF1.K.Keshava Murthy, Advocate )<\/p>\n
‘Y’
\n‘ma<\/p>\n
E
\nto
\n1<\/span><\/p>\n
This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378 (4) of
\nCr.P.C. praying to set aside the impugned judgment and
\norder dated 24.8.2007 passed by the I\u00bb-ion’blefX’.X)(\\\/I
\nAdd|.City Civil 8: Sessions Judge, (CCH–37), Bang’al.o’re’,”–VVin
\nCriminal Appeai No.1944\/2006 and confirm th.e~~-.jud_gi’:”rieritg<\/p>\n
and order dated 12.12.2006 made by the XIX.A”‘Addi.’C._’i~l
\nBangaiore, in C.C.No.31060\/2002, ac_qu~i.tti’n_g* 0 tn’e__ <\/p>\n
respondent\/accused for the offence _pun_i_shabIe ti’nder”S.ectio.n
\n138 of N.I. Act. I   ‘7 v V ” ‘<\/p>\n
This Criminal Appeai coming Conifer hea.r.in’g” thisf<\/p>\n
the Court made the foilowing E  <\/p>\n
This appealjisfileidwbyitlie”  assailing the<\/p>\n
correctness order_V:=d_a’te’d–“_2?}:””August 2007, passed<\/p>\n
by the i.i%d\u00a2=.=ar1rig1e*s*1r..>g’i<$.1\/IAd.di.clgty11civil & Sessions Judge,<\/p>\n
Bangalore,.,_ign .crim'il\u00bbi.a: Apise\u00e9i i\\io.1944\/2006.<\/p>\n
  _V;""1.Tj\u00a32_e"\u00ab\u00abfacts of the case are : the complainant<\/p>\n
 is said to have worked under the<\/p>\n
\u00abgaccus\u00e9ed "for"s.ome time. The accused was in the habit of<\/p>\n
 "'..p.or:'lo-wing money from the complainant. In the month<\/p>\n
january 2001, accused borrowed a sum of<\/p>\n
'V<\/p>\n
'4.)<\/p>\n
Rs.50,000\/– from the complainant and issued a cheque<\/p>\n
for Rs.50,000\/–. When the complainant presented:'\u00ab,t"iie<\/p>\n
cheque, it came to be dishonoured. As <\/p>\n
issuance of legal notice, since ,a'ccused'..,did _Aln'o_t,vm:ake'.<\/p>\n
payment, complaint came to _be fiiilediagainst_j_him'<\/p>\n
the trial Court in C.C.No.31O\u20acrQ:\/'20D.2."*._VThe? triallvlwcourt 8<\/p>\n
after enquiry, formed'::4'.a_n  ilfw\ufb02really the
\naccused has not  from the
\ncomplainant,  i=ii;a'T\\"\/Resre'pVi'ieq…'\u00abfAsuitably to the
\nnotice issued.'   that the accused
\nhas  against the complainant<\/p>\n
regarding 'steaiin'g'=.pF"thei"cheque and having' entertained<\/p>\n
_a douVl:3.;t'as.to the cattituide of the accused, it opined that,<\/p>\n
Vl\ufb02jgf coAm,pla'i*nant had committed the theft of the<\/p>\n
chleqguhet,'  not have stolen one cheque leaf, but<\/p>\n
 ':~Vould."l*:ay"e,, stolen the entire cheque book itself. Thus, it<\/p>\n
  the accused guilty of the offence punishable under<\/p>\n
4V-__,_"Sl7ection 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881,<\/p>\n
V<\/p>\n
and convicted and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.1<\/p>\n
lakh and in default of payment of fine, to u:'\u00e9.d'ergo<\/p>\n
simple imprisonment for a period of two <\/p>\n
aggrieved, the accused preferredypan app~ea'iv~–:ifn:CrirnViria:i 2<\/p>\n
Appeal No.1944\/2006. The Agmeiiate'ciotaiftiiiiiaxgmgj'<\/p>\n
noted the conduct of the complaainanv-tijandi't\u00bbhe{_javccu'sed, <\/p>\n
accepting the versionftof thye.imaLc_cused.,.'"a–coui..t\u00a7ted the
\naccused and dismissed""'th_e  which,
\nthe present apvpe;'a!.._is  urging
\nvarious  . i I it <\/p>\n
3. counsel appearing for both
\nthe parti_es.Vi” i it it<\/p>\n
   by learned counsel appearing for<\/p>\n
  the aip__peiv_i.a~n:t}1.complainant that initial presumption is in<\/p>\n
 o\ufb02the compiaihant as per Section 139 of the<\/p>\n
and it is for the accused to rebut the<\/p>\n
 .:’_”ps=e~s:umption. The triai Court rightly accepted the<\/p>\n
33:”\n<\/p>\n
version of the complainant and by hoiding that,.__i_t is<\/p>\n
improbabie that the cheque couid have been <\/p>\n
the compiainant, has convicted the accused;  <\/p>\n
Appeiiate Court has not rightiy'””int’erfe\u00e9re.d<\/p>\n
reasoned judgment of the triai Co’t_irt’.._x iViit_.jht’A’i:ae’ <\/p>\n
are some inconsistencies in    the
\ncompiainant. He being.    ‘form the
\nbasis to interfere with   lay the trial
\nCourt to acquit   to support his
\narguments,  of the Supreme
\nCourt in   -vs– MOHAN (AIR 2010<\/p>\n
SUPREME”C(\u00a7URT’=t1″$98)”*-cto. contend that the initiai<\/p>\n
_Vpresum_ption is “in.._VV:favo:ur of the complainant and the<\/p>\n
“o_nus*.i,s o_niit%iie”*accused to rebut the presumption. He<\/p>\n
 furtherv.re”i’ieVd.j.up.on the decision of the Andhra Pradesh<\/p>\n
 High C”otirt..Vih’ the case of GORANTLA VENKATESWARA<\/p>\n
–[b’R;<to'V -'-iv.-se kou_A I\/EERA RAGHA VA RAO AND ANOTHER<\/p>\n
 NCRL.\u00a3..J. 1), to contend that faiiure on the part<\/p>\n
,5-\n<\/p>\n
of the accused in giving reply to the legal notice issued<\/p>\n
by the complainant is a strong circumstance <\/p>\n
inference that the accused borrowed the  <\/p>\n
the complainant.\n<\/p>\n
5. Per contra, learned co_unse’l. appea,rinig\u00ab~vfor~~ithe = L’<\/p>\n
respondent~accused has suh_mViAtvted.._,,Athat’,’–i…throughout
\nthere is an  complainant
\nas to lending “of:  rather the
\naccused is  whom the
\ncorrii\ufb02lainanti\u00bb   as”””‘a”}driver. He further
\n has voluntarily left the<\/p>\n
job. Heywaslhhardlyw’;ear_riii’1Ej Rs.2,5DO\/– per month, and<\/p>\n
fdut O5:,.,5v’irhi.,\u20ac\u00bbl1,”i–l7e h’ad””t’oV maintain his family. He further<\/p>\n
slubrfiiits’\u00e9tize\ufb02complainant has no sufficient income<\/p>\n
‘  “‘iexcept..,:_Vthe~ paid by the accused and if he had<\/p>\n
“\u00ab’l.–Ti,”,’A’r’ea!i,yyadyanced the amount to the accused, he could not<\/p>\n
A “have”\u00bb:e,iot quite and easily left the job and go away. He<\/p>\n
if isubmits that, in the usual course, the accused was in<\/p>\n
\\.S<'\/<\/p>\n
'%<\/p>\n
– 7-\n<\/p>\n
the habit of keeping one or two cheques with him for the<\/p>\n
purpose of purchasing medicines. From which, one<\/p>\n
cheque has been stoien by the compia\u00e9nant <\/p>\n
misused the same. Even the accused, <\/p>\n
know of the fact of filing of r;’orn”pi.a_iri’t <\/p>\n
approached the poiice authoritiesi\u00e9’.__T:i’i.|,_zthen’,_\u00abv_,’tAhe <\/p>\n
was not aware of the cheqtje\u00bb bein*g_V_”s,t.o|e’ri,”toy the<\/p>\n
complainant. Onlyvion   knovv “that the
\ncompiaint has V beenAVV_J\ufb01Eiedhv”__VV fhim, accused
\napproached Police to fife
\ncomp|aint._  advised not to register the<\/p>\n
case as aiready a ‘cas,.eu”‘\u00abi.s”‘r”i|ed against him, as such, he<\/p>\n
 keptjjuite. The\ufb02liearned counsel further submitted that<\/p>\n
 had no financiai capacity to advance the<\/p>\n
‘Aish.inconsistency in the version of the<\/p>\n
‘scompilainanht, and that even the Pass Book produced by<\/p>\n
it iiftrhieicompiainant reflects that at the reievant point of<\/p>\n
V..__””.”tinae, there was no such amount being drawn from the<\/p>\n
*3″\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
-3″\n<\/p>\n
Bank and the stand of the complainant that he had aiso<\/p>\n
borrowed the amount from his friend, cajnn’o..tC’~’-Vvbe<\/p>\n
accepted. He further submits that, <\/p>\n
examined on behalf of the COmp.!ain.a4rjt <\/p>\n
he used to lend some times Rs.i{)O\/ieoir <\/p>\n
complainant. The Appel|a\u00bbtej”Court’, the”:<\/p>\n
evidence of the accused an..d——*h’i”s\u00ab son, rightiiy\ufb01acquitted
\nthe accused by a reasonedi\u00e9iccordingiy, he
\nsubmitted that .impAug’n,e;d  does not call for
\ninterference’ <\/p>\n
6.’V_Ih___  arguments advanced, the<\/p>\n
point that ‘woul’d.a’i–fisAe_’fo\u00a7; consideration is, whether the<\/p>\n
“”o.rde.r:’:”io\ufb01,,’~.\u00a7cquittai”passed by the lower Appeiiate Court<\/p>\n
caiis,For::i:’n,te’rfere..nce and, whether the Appeiiate Court is<\/p>\n
C   justified v_i.rs~re’.versing the order of the trial Court.<\/p>\n
2   What is being noted in the case on hand is that,<\/p>\n
A”4″‘~-___'”:there exists a fiduciary relationship between the<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
40\u00bb
\ncheque has been stoien by the Complainant. The<\/p>\n
Appeiiate Court has observed that the accused ca__me to<\/p>\n
know about this oniy after he returned from <\/p>\n
accepted the stand taken by the accused <\/p>\n
to know about filing of the compfain-tyagainxstiilhim viater’. it<\/p>\n
It has further observed that,  comp|ia’i:3Aa’nt<\/p>\n
capacity to make payment  i\u00abm’rnejdia’t.eI’y’ after,’V’<\/p>\n
the Complainant had .ii’ef_t_ th.e””}O’bt;\u00e9\u00bbif’heF be’Cau”Se of the<\/p>\n
‘conduct of the accused  the:’com’pA!’ain’.ant must have<\/p>\n
voluntariiy |ef’t”‘the  iand “‘th:e:–“‘co.mpiainant has not<\/p>\n
taken a_ny_ac’tivi(.i.n_yVV_a3gai’ny:st.vv_th_e_’accused. It is clear from<\/p>\n
the stand taken ‘by”jvt’he””cofn’.pEainant that during lanuary<\/p>\n
 20O1.4,_;’he..had “ie.n’tV”Rsv{5O,OO0\/- to the accused and also<\/p>\n
 the..c:om.”p:i.ai.nA’a.nt had some amount with him kept in the<\/p>\n
 had brought some amount from his<\/p>\n
safrienhd and “lent the same to the accused. Subsequentiy<\/p>\n
 ‘2..jwhat'”\u00ab.iys being anaiysed by the Appeiiate Court iooking in<\/p>\n
 Pass Book produced by the compiainant is that,<\/p>\n
W,<\/p>\n
in the version of the compiainant, it appears, ._ the<\/p>\n
Appeilate Court has rightly acquitted the accusedc.Q:’Lb_dQ<\/p>\n
not find any scope for interference with <\/p>\n
Order.\n<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal is accortiingly \u00a3i5sihisse’ti;VA:   ”<\/p>\n
*b’1-5\/\\:1i4:’_ .<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010 Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh IN THE HIGH COURT OF XARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS ma 9*” DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 BEFORE : THE HON’BE.E MRJUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAn(gE!\u00a7t<i\\ QRIMINAL APPEAL No.158\u00a7g2oo7_,j? A Bggwgen : M.MaIiesh S\/o Malia, Aged about 40 years, C\/0 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-156806","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-14T09:41:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-14T09:41:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2\"},\"wordCount\":1436,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2\",\"name\":\"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-14T09:41:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-14T09:41:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-14T09:41:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2"},"wordCount":1436,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2","name":"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-14T09:41:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-mallesh-vs-dr-d-c-ramegowda-on-9-september-2010-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M Mallesh vs Dr D C Ramegowda on 9 September, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/156806","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=156806"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/156806\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=156806"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=156806"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=156806"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}