Karnataka Court April 1987 Judgments

Assistant Commissioner Vs. Lakshmi Bai

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1988Kant11; ILR1987KAR2132

Venkatachaliah, J.1. This Appeal involves the question whether a reference made by the Land Acquisition Officer under S. 18(3)(a) of the Karnataka Land Acquisition (Extension and Amendment) Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) beyond the period of 90 days stipulated therein is, by that reason alone, an invalid reference. In Uppara Basappa v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, ILR 1986 Kant 2102 a learned single Judge has taken the view that a reference made by the Land Acquisition Officer beyond 90 days contemplated in S. 180)(a) is an invalid reference.Another learned single Judge, in Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. (Wvg) Co. Ltd. v. Lakshmavva, : AIR1982Kant347 has held such reference to be valid if the reference was within 3 years and 90 days from the date of filing of a valid application under S. 18(l) of the Act. There is thus a divergence of judicial opinion on the point, which requires to be resolved here.The appeal is by the Assistant Commissioner, B.S. Division, Belgaum, directed against the ju...

M.R. Nagaraju Vs. Bangalore University

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR1930

ORDERMurlidher Rao, J.1. Petitioners 1 and 2 are working as Senior Assistants in Bangalore University and Petitioner-3 is the Superintendent in the Examination Branch of the Bangalore University. According to the Statutes, both these posts are included in Class III of Schedule C. Section 50 of the Karnataka State Universities Act, 1976 deals with the appointment of non-teaching and ministerial staff. Sub-sections (5) and (6), on the basis of which the arguments are constructed by the learned Advocate read thus :'(5) All appointments shall be made by the Syndicate.In case of difference between the Board and the Syndicate, the matter shall be referred to the Chancellor, whose decision shall be final.Provided that appointments to posts, the maximum of the scale of pay of which does not exceed rupees two thousand and twenty four shall be made by the Vice-Chancellor.(6) Notwithstanding anything in the preceding subsections, appointments to posts in the University equivalent to Group 'C' and...

Ratnakar B. Kailaje Vs. Ramrao Narasingrao Divigi

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR1486

Doddakalegowda, J.1. These appeals are preferred by certain persons belonging to an enlightened section of Hindus in this Country known as 'Saraswat Brahmins' being aggrieved by the Judgment and decree of the Learned District Judge, Karwar, in an administration suit filed by four other persons belonging to the same community.2. R.F.A. No. 158 of 1980 is preferred by defendants 10 to 18 and R.F.A. No. 159 of 1980 by defendants 19 to 28 against the judgment and decree dated 29th November 1980, passed in O.S. No. 2 of 1977 on the file of the District Judge, Uttar Kannada, framing a scheme under Section 50 of Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in respect of Sri Chitrapur Math, Shirali Taluk, Bhatkal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Math') at the instance of respondents 1 to 3 (plaintiffs) and one Vasantrao Koppikar who was plaintiff No. 1 before the Trial Court.3. It is common ground that the Math is a public religious institution belonging to a denominati...

State of Karnataka Vs. T. Srinivas

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (1987)IILLJ462Kant

ORDERBopanna, J.1. The question referred to us in this appeal is whether the suit seeking a declaration that the respondent's correct date of birth is 19th August, 1961 and for a mandatory injunction directing the authorities concerned to correct the date of his birth in the concerned registers is maintainable in the Civil Court. 2. The Respondent/Plaintiff before the Trial Court sought for a declaration that his correct date of birth was 19th August, 1961 and for the consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing Defendants 1 and 2, viz., the State of Karnataka and the Secretary, K.S.E.E. Board (in short 'the State Government' and 'the Board' respectively) to enter his correct date of birth in the school records and to rectify the earlier records and for other incidental reliefs. 3. It is not in dispute that before filing the suit the plaintiff had issued a notice as required under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'the Code') and in reply to this notice the ...

State of Karnataka and anr. Vs. T. Srinivas

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1988Kant67; ILR1987KAR1843; 1987(1)KarLJ387

Bopanna, J.1. The question referred to us in this appeal is whether the suit seeking a declaration that the respondent's correct date of birth is 19-8-1961 and for a mandatory injunction directing the authorities concerned to correct the date of his birth in the concerned registers is maintainable in the civil court.2. The respondent/Plaintiff before the trial Court sought for a declaration that his correct date of birth was 19-8-1961 and for the consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing Defendants 1 and 2, viz., the State of Karnataka and the Secretary, K.S.E.E. Board (in short the State Government and the Board respectively) to enter his correct date of birth in the school records and to rectify the earlier records and for other incidental reliefs.3. It is not in dispute that before filing the suit the plaintiff had issued a notice as required under S. 80 of the Civil P. C. (in short the Code) and in reply to this notice the 2nd defendant, viz., the Board, declined to co...

H.L. Shivarame Gowda Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR2033

Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. This Writ appeal is filed by the petitioners, whose Writ Petition No. 6916/1979 was dismissed by the Learned Single Judge on 14th September, 1979.2. Parties are referred hereinafter with reference to their respective rankings in the Writ Petition.3. Petitioners challenged the action of the third respondent (Town Municipal Council, Bellur Town) auctioning the site in question as also the approval dated 15-5-1979 accorded by the State Government by confirming the said action of the third respondent, under Section 72(2) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 ('Act' for short).4. The subject-matter is Site No, 155-C of Bellur Town in Mandya District. Originally this site was part of Sy. No. 105. In a portion of this Sy. No. 105 the Municipality got constructed four twin-houses for its purposes. It is stated that another portion was set apart, us Site No. 155-C measuring 150' x 150' to locate a touring cinema. The District Magistrate granted 'No Objection Certific...

Erammanavara Aswathappa Vs. Karnataka Electricity Board and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1987Kant282

ORDER1. The petitioners the owner of 6 acres and 26 guntas of land in S. Nos. 156/1, 156/2 of Karekatiahalli village, Gowribidanur Taluk, Kolar District. He applied to the Tahsildar, Gowribidanur Taluk for permission to divert the said agricultural land for non-agricultural use, to wit, to form a lay out for building sites. He has asserted the lay-out plan is as shown in Annexure-B, the sketch. Though the exact date on which the application for conversion was made is not disclosed, permission appears to have been given on 27-10-1986 for diverting the land for such non-agricultural use- as is evident from Annexure-A to the petition.2. Annexure-C is a representation made by the petitioner to the Superintending Engineer (Electrical) Karnataka Electricity Board, Major Works Circle, Bangalore, bearing the date 18-6-1986. In that representation he has stated that he has formed a lay-out in S. Nos. 156/1 and 156/2 of Karekallahalli village with much difficulty incurring heavy expenditure. To ...

Basavaraj Vs. Shekhar and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1987KAR1399

Skyamasundar, J.1. This appeal arising under S. I 10-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, is by consent of learned counsel on both sides taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this judgment.2. The appeal is directed against the award dt. 26-12-1984 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gulbarga in M.V.C. No. 86 of 1983 on its file. The Tribunal awarded to the claimant-appellant a sum of Rs. 6,000/-as compensation for the injuries the claimant sustained at a mishap in which he was involved on the 24th April, 1983 at a place called Kembhavi, some distance from the city of Gulbarga. The appellant feels aggrieved by this award under appeal, complains of its stymied nature and seeks enhancement.3. Having heard learned counsel on either side, we feel that the award in question suffers from extreme conservatism not justified in the facts and circumstances, besides it also appears to have been arrived without conforming to well settled parameters to which this court has on a number of oc...

Raghavendra Rao Vs. Dodda Ramalingappa

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1988KAR215; 1988(1)KarLJ181

K.A. Swami, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 31-3-1977 passed by the Civil Judge, Raichur, in R.A.No. 121 of 1975 affirming the decree dated 28-8-1975 passed by the Munsiff, Raichur, in O.S.No. 144 of 1973.2. The appellant filed the aforesaid suit for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants - respondents from interfering with his peaceful possession of the land bearing Survey No. 322 measuring 18 acres 19 guntas assessed at Rs. 25-72 situated at Kadlur Village, Raichur Taluk, extending up to the public road towards south. The plaintiff's case was that he was the owner in possession of the land bearing S.No. 322. The further case of the plaintiff was that the defendants disputed the possession of the suit land to the extent of 1 acre 5 guntas abutting the road on the south. The defendants resisted the suit. On the basis of the pleadings the trial Court framed the following issues:'(1) Whether the plaintiff proves that he is i...

State of Karnataka Vs. Eshwaraiah and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Nesargi, J. 1. The State has challenged the judgment of acquittal passed by the XVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City on 2-1-1985 in Sessions Case No. 32 of 1983 acquitting the respondents, who were accused Nos. 1 and 2 before him, for having committed the offence punishable under S. 302 read with S. 34, I.P.C. 2. The deceased is one Ramesh son of Sri Krishnaswamy Rao. 3. The undisputed facts are that the deceased was residing in his house No. 6/5, 9th Cross, Adarsha Nagar, Chamarajpet, Bangalore. He was a bachelor, aged about 38 years at the time of his death, which has taken place during the night between 14th and 15th December, 1982. A-2 has not disputed that she was the mistress of the deceased for more than 7-8 years prior to the date of incident. She was also residing in house in Kottege Ramachandra Rao's Vatara, in which the house of the deceased is situated. She was often visiting the house of Ramesh, the deceased, during night time. She had filed an ap...