Karnataka Court August 1981 Judgments
Mysore (Now Karnataka) State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Somashanka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-10-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Kant226
Kulkarni, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated Sept,. 1, 1976 passed by the Principal Civil Judge, Bangalore District, Bangalore, in O.S. 74/1973 decreeing the suit for Rs. 27,496-50 with 6 percent interest from the date of decree onwards.2. On June 10, 1972, there was an accident between the vehicle of the appellant-Corporation and the Tourist bus belonging to the respondent. As a result of the accident, the Tourist bus suffered damage and some passengers were also injured with fatal accident to one or two. The injured and the legal representatives of the deceased made claim petitions before the Accident Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal held therein that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle of the appellant.3. The respondent claiming compensation for the damage caused to the vehicle, filed a suit against the appellant for recovery of the amount spent towards the repairs. The suit was decreed in part and the Corporation...
Tag this Judgment!K. Kempamma Vs. Peeceeyes Industries P. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-07-1981
Reported in: [1983]54CompCas368(Kar)
Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This petition under s. 433(1)(f) of the Companies Act, '1956, is made by one of the shareholders, an ex-director of the company, praying for an order of winding-up on just and equitable grounds. 2. Respondent No. 1 company was formed under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, (hereinafter referred to 'the Act'). The nominal capital of the company at the time of incorporation was Rs. 2,00,000 divided into 2,000 share of Rs. 100 each. However, later averments of the petitions disclose clearly that 2,300 share have been issued and the subscribed capital is shown as Rs. 2,30,000. Though there are several allegations of mis management of the company, practically knocking out the substrata of the company, that is not a ground available to the petitioner as an ordinary shareholder, not representing 10 per cent. of the total subscribed capital. The only ground urged by Sri K. G. Raghavan, learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the petition being admit...
Tag this Judgment!Neelawwa Vs. Basappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-07-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Kant126; ILR1981KAR1360
1. Neelawwa, widow of Huchanpa and co-widow of Basawannevva, instituted Original Suit No. 34 of 1974 on the file of the Munsiff, Kundgol, for partition and possession of her share. She claimed 1/6th share or in the alternative 1/12th share in the suit properties.2. The reason is not far to seek Huchanpa left behind him two widows, four sons and a daughter. Therefore, she claimed 1/12th share.3. The suit was resisted by the defendants. Ultimately, the trial court decreed the suit for 1/84th share. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, she went up in appeal before the principal Civil Judge. Hubli, in Regular Appeal No. 93 of 1975. The learned Civil Judge modified the decree and awarded 1/72nd share in favour of the plaintiff. Aggrived by the same, she has come up in the above second appeal before this Court.4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants argued that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Gurupad Khandappa Magdum v. Hirabai Khandappa...
Tag this Judgment!N. Narayanaswamy Vs. Madanlal
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Kant227; ILR1982KAR238
1. This appeal by the defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 20-4-1977 passed by the 1st Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore, in R. A. No. 17 of 1974 on his file, dismissing the appeal on confirming the judgment and decree dated 4-8-1973 passed by, the 5th Additional First Munsiff, Bangalore in O.S. No. 207/72 on his file, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of money under a pro note.2. The plaintiff instituted a suit at 0. S. No. 207/72 on the file of the Munsiff on the averments that the defendant executed a pro note for valuable consideration on 28-1-1969 as per Ext. P. 1 for Rs. 2500/- agreeing to pay interest at 1 1/2% per mensem. It is further the case of the plaintiff that he received Rs. 600/-towards interest on 29-10-1970 and thereafter though he demanded the amount, he was not paid. Hence, he instituted suit for recovery of principal of Rs. 2500 and balance of interests of Rupees 750 and also the notice charges at Rs. 50.3. The suit was resiste...
Tag this Judgment!Baby Vs. Nathu
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Kant262; ILR1981KAR1301; 1981(2)KarLJ406
Venkatachala, C.J.1. By consent of learned Counsel, this appeal was treated as having been posted for hearing and we heard them.2. This appeal is from the order dated 24-7-1981 of Bhimiah, J. in Writ Petition No. 14284 of 1981 making absolute the exparte ad interim order of injunction granted by him earlier Respondent 3 there in has presented this appeal. For the sake of convenience, the parties will hereinafter be referred to according to their respective positions in the writ petition.3. The petitioner had made an application under Sec, 48-A(1) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1061 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' before the First Land Tribunal', Udupi Taluka (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal'), claiming occupancy right in respect of 20 cents of land in Survey No. 53/313 and 20 cents of land in Survey No. 53/5, both of Moodanidambur village, belonging to respondent 3. The Tribunal. by its order dated 30-11-1977, granted that application.4. That order was quashed by this...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Herur Vs. the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-05-1981
Reported in: AIR1983Kant57
ORDER1. In this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 2-5-1981 passed by the Rent and Accommodation Controller, Civil Area, Bangalore (respondent No.2) in Case No.HRC.266/ACC/81 (Annexure-B) and also the order dated 28th May 1981 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore (respondent No.1) in Case No.H.R.C. Civil Appeal No.13/81-82 and 20/81-82 (Annexure-D). By the aforesaid order, the 2nd respondent has allotted the residential premises in question bearing No.298/A, I Main Road. 8th Block, Jayanagara, Bangalore, to the 3rd respondent. In the appeal, the order of allotment is confirmed by the first respondent. The petitioner is the owner of the premises in question.2. The contention of the petitioner has been that the 3rd respondent owns a residential building built on Site No.137, 6th 'A' Cross, Rajamahal Vilas Extension; therefore, he is not eligible for the allotment of the premises in question having re...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. State of Karnataka and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-03-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Kant167; ILR1981KAR1295
D.M. Chandrashekhar, C.J.1. By consent of learned counsel, this appeal is treated as having been posted for hearing and we have heard them.2. This is an appeal from the order of Puttaswamy, J., dismissing Writ Petition No. 12191 of 1981. The petitioner therein, the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) has presented the appeal.3. In the writ petition, the Corporation had prayed for declaring R. 123-A of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) as being ultra vires of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to' as the Act) and to grant consequential relief's. The Corporation had also prayed for an interim order staying further proceedings before the Karnataka State Transport Authority (hereinafter referred to as the S. T. A.) on an application by respondent 3 for renewal of the All India Tourist permit which had been granted to him under sub-section (7) of S. 63 of the Act.4. The All Indi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›