Karnataka Gulbarga Court December 2012 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
The State of Karnataka Vs. Abdul Hammed and Another
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Dec-13-2012
Heard. By the impugned judgment the respondents herein were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003 and are sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1,500/- each. Default sentence is also imposed. The State has filed this appeal praying for enhancement of sentence on the ground that inadequate sentence is imposed on the respondents. Case of the prosecution is that the complainant Manohar Rao Biradar who was the Assistant Executive Engineer at GESCOM, Vigilance, Bidar, on getting credible information of theft of electricity pertaining to the house of accused persons situated at Naubad went to the spot along with staff and police at about 4.00 PM on 05.01.2007. They inspected the installation of R.R.No.NBL 320, which stood in the name of accused No.1 and found that there is a direct hook from the LT line and consequently the electricity was being used unlawfully, though the meter was already removed. Thus it was prima facie clear that there was theft of electri...
Rudraguoda Vs. the Divisional Controller, N.E.K.R.T.C., Raichur
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Dec-10-2012
1. This writ petition is directed against the award in KID No.158/2011 dated 14.3.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gulbarga. 2. The petitioner had been working with the respondent Corporation as a Conductor. Disciplinary proceedings was initiated against him and it was alleged that he had not issued tickets to two passengers despite collection of the fare. After holding an enquiry, the Corporation dismissed him from service on 27.5.2011. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing a claim petition before the Labour Court in KID No.158/2011. The Labour Court has dismissed the said petition by its order at Annexure-D dated 14.3.2012. 3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 4. It is not in dispute that an industrial dispute relating to charter of demands in I.D.No.148/2005 in which the workman is concerned is pending before the Industrial Tribunal at Bangalore. The workman was dismissed from service during the pendency of the said dispute. It is also...
The Special Land Acquisition Officer M and Mip Vs. Neelkantappa and An ...
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
(Prayer: This MSA is filed under Section 54(2) of the LA Act, praying to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment and award dated 17.7.2010 passed in LAC.Appeal No.181/2009 on the file of the I Addl.District and Sessions/Special Judge, Gulbarga, in the interest of justice and equity.) 1. There is a delay of 52 days in filing the appeal. Accepting the cause shown, delay of 52 days in filing the appeal stands condoned. I.A.No.1/2012 is allowed accordingly. 2. The State has filed this appeal against the judgment and award passed in LACA No.181/2009, by which the compensation is enhanced to Rs.75,543/- per acre. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the first appellate Court was not justified in condoning the delay of about 3172 days in filing the appeal and that the first appellate Court is not justified in enhancing the compensation to Rs.75,543/-. 3. Valid reasons are assigned by the Court below while condoning the delay. The claimants are entitled to similar compensatio...
The Special Land Acquisition Officer, M and Mip Vs. Rehemansab and Ano ...
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
(Prayer: This MSA is filed under Section 54 (2) of LA Act, against the judgment and award dated 15.04.2010 passed in LACA No.93/2009 on the file of the II Addl. District Judge, At Gulbarga, allowing the appeal and setting aside the Judgment and award dated 09.01.2001 passed in lac No.1496/1997 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) at Gulbarga.) 1. There is a delay of 477 days in filing the appeal. Accepting the cause shown, delay of 477 days in filing the appeal stands condoned. I.A.No.1/2012 is allowed accordingly. 2. The State has filed this appeal against the judgment and award passed in LACA No.93/2009, by which the compensation is enhanced to Rs.65,000/- per acre. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the First Appellate Court was not justified in condoning the delay of about 3162 days in filing the appeal and that the First Appellate Court is not justified in enhancing the compensation to Rs.65,000/-. 3. Valid reasons are assigned by the Court below while cond...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›