Karnataka Dharwad Court February 2011 Judgments

The Divisional Manager Vs. Prakash and Another

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

(Prayer: This Misc First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of M.V. Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated: 14.06.2010, passed in M.V.C.No.544/2006, on the file of the Addl. Senior Civil Judge and AMACT, Ranebennur, Awarding the compensation of Rs.2,06,896/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation.) 1. Appeal by the insurance company under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the Act), to wriggle out of the joint liability in terms of the order and award dated 14-6-2010 passed in MVC No 544 of 2006, on the file of Addl Civil Judge and AMACT, Ranebennur, on the most frivolous and cantankerous ground of the person who was driving the vehicle - an autocab - permitted to carry three passengers in addition to the driver, was not duly licenced to drive that vehicle, though such person did hold a valid licence to drive a “transport vehicle” as endorsed on the very licence. 2. It is for making ...

M/S. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., by Its Divisional Manager, Represent ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

(This Appeal is filed U/s. 173(1) of MV Act 1988 against the Judgment and Award dated 20.07.2007 passed in MVC No.520/2006 on the file of the member, Addl. Mact and presiding Officer, fast track court-II, Koppal, awarding compensation of Rs.23,000/- along with interest of at the rate of 6% P.A., from the date of petition till its deposit.) The present appeals reveal the careless and negligent manner of functioning of the appellant M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Bellary Branch, who has preferred these appeals questioning the legality of the order and award passed by the Member, Addl. M.A.C.T. and P.O, Fast track Court-II, Koppal in M.V.C. No.520/2006 and M.V.C. No.521/2006 dated 20.07.2007 awarding a compensation in a sum of Rs.23,000/- and Rs.20,000/- respectively in favour of first respondent in both the appeals, contending that the Insurance Company even when had no liability to pay any amount, particularly as the first respondent in M.F.A.No.13506/2007 was an unauthorized ...

Smt. Satyavva Vs. Hubli Dharwad Municipal Corporation by Its Commissio ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Reported in: 2011ILR(Kar)2004; 2011(4)KCCR2844

ABDUL NAZEER, J 1. Since common question of law and fact are involved in all these cases, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners contend that they are occupying different portions of land bearing Sy.No.36A of Unkal Village, Hubli Taluk, Dharwad District. They have put up small sheds/huts on the said land and have been residing in those sheds for the past 30 to 35 years. The Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporation (for short the “Corporation”) has assigned corporation number to their huts and it has been collecting taxes from them. The area in question has been declared as a slum area under Section 3 of the Slum Area (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956. The petitioners have produced the tax paid receipt issued by the Corporation. The Forest Contractors and Timber Merchants’ Association Limited, Hubli, filed a petition before this Court in Writ Petition No.12420/2006 for a mandamus directing the Corporation to develop the...

Maktumsab Vs. the Director, Municipal Administration and Another

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Abdul Nazeer, J. 1. The petitioner contends that his father Mehaboobsab was working as a Driver with the City Municipal Council, Bagalkot. He had made an application as per Annexure ‘A’ dated 6.7.1989 seeking voluntary retirement w.e.f. 31.10.1989. Since he did not receive any response from the second respondent with regard to his application, he continued to work with the City Municipal Council, Bagalkot, till his death i.e., 6.1.1991. It is further contended that respondent No.2 by his order dated 17.5.1991 granted retrospective voluntary retirement to the father of the petitioner w.e.f. 31.10.1989. It is the case of the petitioner that the said order is illegal for the reason that the rules do not authorize the second respondent to pass an order granting permission retrospectively for voluntary retirement of a public servant. The petitioner having passed SSLC examination made an application for his appointment on compassionate grounds. The first respondent by him communi...

K.M. Prabhakar Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

ANAND BYRAREDDY, J: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the leaned Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. These appeals are preferred in respect of the same judgment. The appeal in 454/2004 is filed by the accused challenging the order of conviction insofar as offence under Section 13(1)(d) punishable under Section 13(2) is concerned, whereas the appeal in 1283/2008 is filed, by the respondent in the first of these appeals, challenging the acquittal of the accused under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: It is stated that the complainant, one Dattatreya Someshwara Hegde and his family own 17 acres of land bearing survey Nos.110, 111, 91 and 92 in Mavinakoppa and Sannikere villages. The complainant and his elder brother were cultivating the land and taking care of the affairs pertaining thereto. The complainant is said to be a graduate in Arts. In an area of 8 acres, the complainant and his family have gro...