Karnataka Court July 1994 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.
Dorai and Another Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ2987; ILR1994KAR2391; 1994(4)KarLJ492
ORDER1. The petitioners have filed this petition under section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail. A charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners for offences under sections 394 and 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution case is that on 12-9-1993 between 11.30 and 11.45 p.m. when the complainant, his father Puttiah and two others were proceeding in an autorickshaw, the accused persons stopped the same near Seshadripuram Railway bridge, threw chilly powder on Puttaiah's face, forcibly took Puttiah and the complainant in an autorickshaw and near Oklipuram the petitioners and another absconding accused Kutti stabbed Puttiah and robbed a sum of Rs. 50,550/- along with the bag in which the amount was kept and escaped, and that Puttiah succumbed to the injuries sustained by him.2. The first petitioner was arrested on 30-10-1993 and the second petitioner was arrested on 11-10-1993 during the course of the investigation of another case by Kengerigate police. They were remanded to judicial ...
P. Lankesh and Another Vs. H. Shivappa and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1994
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT(Cri)231; 1994CriLJ3510; ILR1994KAR2410; 1994(4)KarLJ295
ORDER1. The first petitioner who is the printer, editor and publisher of a news magazine of Lankesh Patrike, in whose magazine an article containing alleged defamatory imputations against the respondent complainant written by the second petitioner is stated to have been published and the 2nd petitioner are being prosecuted by the respondent for an offence under section 500 I.P.C. in the court of the J.M.F.C., Davanagere. The respondent lives in Davanagere and the Bharda Sugar Factory, of which he is the chairman, is also located in Davanagere taluk. The alleged defamatory article refers mainly to the respondent's conduct as chairman of the said sugar factory. 2. The petitioner, by an application under section 177 read with Section 179 Cr.P.C., contended that as the news magazine was admittedly printed and published at Bangalore the offence has been completed at Bangalore and the Court at Davanagere had no jurisdiction to try the case merely because the complainant resides there or that...
Banavasi Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Sangh Ltd. Vs. N.C. Bapat
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2496; 1994(3)KarLJ508; (1995)ILLJ520Kant
ORDERKrishna Moorthy, J. 1. The petitioner, a Society is challenging the order Annexure 'A' dated 11-5-1994 passed by the second respondent Labour Court refusing to consider an issue as a preliminary issue in dispute between the petitioner and the first respondent. 2. The first respondent was working as Secretary of the Petitioner-Society and he was dismissed from Service retrospectively from 1-8-1973 for an act of misconduct involving misappropriation of the Society's funds. The first Respondent gave a representation to the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies on 25-6-1974. As the Assistant Registrar could not direct the Society to withdraw the order of dismissal, the appellant filed a Suit before the Munsiff Court, Sirsi, in O. S. 4/75. On 31-10-1977, the plaint was returned for being presented to a proper Court. Thereafter, the first respondent moved the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies against the order of dismissal. That dispute was numbered and by an order d...
Chandrahasa N. Shanbhag Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1994
Reported in: I(1995)ACC116; 1995ACJ267; ILR1994KAR2848; 1994(3)KarLJ156
ORDERKrishna Moorthy, J. 1. The only question that is involved in this writ petition is as to whether the minor unmarried sister of an insured person will be a member of the family as defined under Section 2(11) of the Employees' state Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter refereed to as 'the Act'). The above section reads as follows : '2. (11) : 'family' means all or any of the following persons, namely :- (i) a spouse; (ii) a minor legitimate or adopted child dependent upon the insured person; (iii) a child who is wholly dependent on the earnings of the insured person and who is - (a) receiving education, till he or she attains the age of twenty-one years, (b) an unmarried daughter; (iv) a child who is infirm by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury and is wholly dependent on the earnings of the insured persons, so long as the infirmity continues; (v) dependent parents.' 2. The petitioner claims reimbursement of the amount which is spent for the treatment of his si...
Nagareswara Setty Vs. Prabhakar Setty
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2826; 1994(4)KarLJ476
ORDERSadashiva, J1. This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 14-11-1993 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Hospet, on I.A.No. III in A.C.No. 2/92 directing the petitioner to pay or deposit a sum of Rs. 2,88,495/- on the ground that the same is admittedly payable to the respondent2. The respondent filed an application in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Hospet, under Sections 8 and 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act') for filing arbitration agreement, to appoint an Arbitrator and to make a Reference on points of disputes to the Arbitrator so appointed for making an Award. The points of dispute on which the Reference has been sought are as follows :1. Whether the petitioner does not continue to be the partner despite expulsion ?2. Whether the partners are entitled to expel the partner under law ?3. Whether the opponents are not liable to account from such date of alleged expulsion and continue to pay the petitioner his share of profits, etc.?3. The...
Girdharilal Vs. Pratap Rai Mehta
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2418; 1994(5)KarLJ503
ORDERVenkataraman, J. 1. This Petition is filed by the respondents in Criminal Revision Petition No. 398/88 for recalling the order dated 4-11-1988 passed in the said Revision Petition.2. The Cr.R.P. No. 398/88 had been filed by the complainant in PCR. No. 87/88 on the file of the IV Additional C.M.M., Bangalore, against the order passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing his complaint. This Court by an order dated 4-11-1988 has allowed that Revision Petition and has remitted the matter back to the Magistrate with a direction to make further enquiry and to dispose of the complaint in accordance with law in the light of the observations made in the order.3. As the order in the Criminal Revision Petition had been made on merits, the respondent had raised an objection regarding the maintainability of this Criminal Petition for recalling the order. The Court after hearing both the sides on the question of maintainability of the Petition, has by order dated 1-6-1989 held that the present ...
B.P. Sadashivaiah Vs. Parvathamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2671; 1994(3)KarLJ529
N.D.V. Bhat, J.1. In this Appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 30-1-1990 passed by the XV Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore in O.S.No. 2701/1981. By the said judgment, the lower Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this Appeal, briefly stated, are as under:Plaintiff filed a suit at O.S.No. 2701/81 against the defendants praying for a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dealing with the schedule property in any manner including entertaining into sale transaction with regard thereto or otherwise making waste or causing any encumbrances thereon and for other reliefs referred to in the prayer column. The suit schedule property is a house bearing No. 278, Hosahalli Extension, Bangalore measuring East to West 37'.6' and North to South 45' having the boundary referred to in the schedule. It is not in dispute that the said property was allotted to the husband of defendant-1 in the year...
Proprietor, Radhakrishna Estate Vs. Mary
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-26-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ49; [1995(70)FLR211]; ILR1994KAR3111; 1994(4)KarLJ610; (1995)ILLJ695Kant
R. Ramakrishna, J. 1. This Appeal is under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short the 'Act'). Notice was ordered for the respondent and she is represented. 2. By taking consent of the learned Advocates, the Appeal is heard on its merits and the following Order is passed. 3. An important question that requires determination in this Appeal is : 'Whether the maxim 'Actionn Personalis Moritur Cum Persona' is applicable to claims arising under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923'? 4. For proper appreciation of this question the brief facts of the case presented is as follows : One Doreswamy who claimed to be a workmen in the estate owned by the appellant has filed an application under Section 3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act before the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, Kodagu for the employment injury said to have been sustained on 21.2.1983 when he was employed by the appellant. When this application was pending the said Doreswamy died a natural ...
Rudraswamy Vs. Deputy Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-26-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2958
Hari Nath Tilhari, J. 1. By this Petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to collect the conversion charges from the petitioner concerning Sy.No. 80/7C measuring 1 acre 9 guntas situated at Hiriyoor Village, Chitradurga District. He has also prayed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari and quashing the order -Annexure 'D' dated 28-9-1991 passed by the Deputy Commissioner.2. Facts of the case in brief are ; that the petitioner, who claims to be the owner in possession of Sy.No. 80/7C measuring 1 acre 9 guntas situated at Hiriyoor Village, Chitradurga District, had applied under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 to the respondent-Deputy Commissioner, seeking his permission for conversion of the land with respect to the purposes thereto from residential to industrial purpose in view of the predominant use of that land. The application was originally made on 18-12-1989 and thereafter, with reference to that application ...
Sridevi Vs. Syndicate Bank
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-26-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2983
Hari Nath Tilhari, J. 1. By this Petition, the petitioner, who is a Bank employee has challenged the suspension order dated 21-3-1992, passed by the Deputy General Manager of the Syndicate Bank in exercise of the powers under Clause-19.12(b) of Bipartite Settlement. The petitioner has prayed that a Writ of Certiorari be issued quashing the suspension order aforesaid as well as the modified order dated 8-9-1992 contained in Annexure-H. The petitioner further prayed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the petitioner's reinstatement and to grant her all consequential reliefs including financial benefits.2. Without going into the details about the facts of the case, it may be mentioned that the petitioner who is a permanent employee of the Syndicate Bank as Typist-cum-Clerk, had been appointed in the year 1984 has been suspended pending enquiry against charge, vide, order dated 21st March, 1992, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-C to this Petition. The petitioner has challenged the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »