Karnataka Court February 1995 Judgments
Vimala Devi Vs. Venkatesha Murthy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-09-1995
Reported in: ILR1995KAR659; 1995(3)KarLJ193
ORDERG.C. Bharuka, J.1. This Revision Petition has been preferred by the tenants who have been directed to vacate the schedule premises on the grounds covered by Clauses (f) and (h) of the Proviso to Section 21(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, ('Act' for short).2. Some of the basic facts which are not in controversy may first be noticed. The schedule premises is a shop measuring 8ft x 8 ft which is situated on the ground floor of the building owned by respondent No. 1 (hereinafter to be referred as 'landlord'). The said premises was taken on rent by late Ramlal, the husband of petitioner No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'tenant'), who had been running a watch repairing business therein till 1985. Thereafter he started his cloth business in the said shop which he continued till his death in September, 1986. The fact of carrying on the said businesses is borne out from the cross-examination of the landlord himself who has been examined as P.W.1. It is also not in dispute ...
Tag this Judgment!Kammalapati Brahmarao Etc. Vs. Gulbarga University and Others Etc.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Kant37; ILR1995KAR824; 1995(3)KarLJ491
ORDER1. K. Brahmarao the petitionerin Writ Petition No. 14533 of 1994 and P. Basavaiah Naidu the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 14851 of 1994 were debarred from taking the examination in Engineering for four years, i.e. for the next eight available examinations, besides forfeiting the performance in the examination in which they are said to have been involved in the commission of malpractice by the respondent Gulbarga University by the impugned order dated 23-3-1994. The petitioners question the order as made in violation of the principles of natural justice and arbitrary.2. K. Brahmarao is a student of final year B.E. Course studying in K.B.N. College of Engineering, Gulbarga. P. Basavaiah Naidu is also a student in the same college studying engineering. K. Brahmarao appeared for Electrical Technology Examination of second year as well as for the final year examination in which he failed in the month of January, 1994 with Registration No. 89B 0565. P. Basavaiah Naidu appeared for Ins...
Tag this Judgment!Sitaram and Another Vs. the Assistant Commissioner, Jamakhandi and Oth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Kant141; ILR1995KAR1446
ORDER1. Heard Smt. Sona. learned Counsel for the petitioners, Sri S. V. Tilgul, learned counsel for the cavcator, respondent and Smt. Meena Kumari, the learned High Court Govt. Pleader. 2. This petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 24-12-94 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Jamkhandi Sub-Division, Bijapur in No. RTS AP 35-36/90, whereby ihc learned Commissioner has cancelled the mutation entry Nos. 15226 and 15227 of R.S. No. 297:1-- 2 : 2 and R.S. No. 181 : 2. In brief the grievance of the petitioner as mentioned in the writ petition as well as the arguments made by the petitioners counsel, Smt, Sona, that the Appellate Authority has acted illegally and without jurisdiction as the appeal had been filed long after the making of the mutation entries in question. The learned counsel, Smt. Sona, pointed out that there had been delay of almost eight years. She further submitted that the learned Assistant Commissioner acted illegally in condoning the delay by not app...
Tag this Judgment!D. Chandrappa Vs. Smt. K. Sunanda and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: II(1995)ACC568; 1996ACJ283; AIR1995Kant384; ILR1995KAR1831; 1995(2)KarLJ455
1. Heard learned advocates representing the appellant, owner of the vehicle, the insurance company and the original claimant. The entire controversy in this appeal is limited to the question as to whether the insurance company can be saddled with the unlimited liability or in other words, whether the insurance company is required to pay the whole of the amount awarded as compensation or whether the liability is limited to Rs. 30,000/ - as contended by them. In this case which pertains to a fatal accident the award was for Rs. 82,934/- with costs and interest at 9% per annum. The claimants had received Rs. 15,000/- as interim compensation and therefore the final award was for a sum of Rs. 67,934/- along with costs and interest. The insurance company had contended that even though an additional premium had been paid and the passengers one of whom was the deceased were separately covered, that their liability was limited to Rs. 30,000/- because this is the cover that is extended for a pre...
Tag this Judgment!R. Muralidharan Vs. Director, National Law School of India University ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: ILR1995KAR843; 1995(3)KarLJ135
ORDER1. The short question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether the respondents are bound to pay the Employers' Contributions to the Provident Fund on the cessation of the contract of employment which the petitioner had entered with the respondent.2. By Annexure A dated March 3, 1988, the petitioner was offered the appointment of Assistant Professor of Law in the National Law School for a maximum period of three years with effect from June 1, 1988, on certain terms and conditions mentioned therein. The petitioner accepted the offer and he continued to work as Assistant Professor of Law for three years in accordance with the provisions contained in Annexure A. On completion of the term, it was renewed for a period of another three years. While he was continuing so, by exercising the provision under the contract of employment, the petitioner gave a notice of termination Annexure R-6 and the services of the petitioner came to be terminated with effect from ...
Tag this Judgment!Mallikarjuna Swamy Vs. University of Agricultural Sciences
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: ILR1995KAR834; 1995(2)KarLJ482
ORDERKrishna Moorthy, J.1. The Respondent University - University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, issued a Notification dated 30.9.1993 inviting applications for the appointment of various posts in the University including (i) Assistant Professor of Agricultural Economics, (ii) Assistant Professor of Agricultural Marketing and (iii) Farm Superintendent. The above Notification is produced as Annexure 'A'. The petitioner applied for an appointment to the above three posts. The last date for submitting the application pursuant to Annexure 'A' Notification was 22.11.1993. Along with the application, the petitioner had enclosed a Certificate dated 20.11.1993 issued by the Professor and Head, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Agricultural Sciences, Hebbal, Bangalore, in which, it is stated that the petitioner had completed the final M.Sc., in Agricultural Economics Degree Programme of the University and that he had secured a Cumulative Grade Point Average of 3.20 out of ...
Tag this Judgment!Raju Reddy Vs. Commissioner, Bda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: ILR1995KAR2514; 1995(4)KarLJ475
ORDERR.V. Raveendran, J.1. The petitioner claims that he is the owner of Survey No. 52 of Hennur Village, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, measuring 1 Acre 33 Guntas; that he had put up six structures in the said property during the year 1980; that the Village Panchayat had assessed the structures to property tax by assigning the No. 235/A (1 to 6) in the Assessment Register for the period 1989-90 and had received tax from him for 1990-91; that petitioner applied to B.D.A. (Respondent) for regularisation of the constructions on 10.11.1992 (vide Annexures E1 and E2) and the said application is not yet disposed of; that though the property was acquired by BDA, as he has already put up constructions prior to 31.3.1990, the petitioner was entitled to regularisation having regard to the provisions of the Karnataka Regularisation of Unauthorised Constructions in Urban Areas Act, 1991 ('Act' for short); and that inspite of it BDA was attempting to demolish the structures in his property. ...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Savitha
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1995
Reported in: ILR1996KAR435
Saldanha, J. 1. Heard the appellant's learned Counsel. This is an Appeal where, it is incumbent that this Court will have to clarify a rather delicate and unusual situation that is not unfamiliar before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals. The issue that is canvassed is with regard to the liability of the appellants - Insurance Company for payment of compensation awarded to the claimant who was a Bus Conductor and who died as a result of being run over by a Tempo on 26.6.1983 at Pandavapura. The claimant is the widow of the deceased who was a Bus Conductor and who had got down from his vehicle and was proceeding towards the Town Hall for some refreshments. The Tempo is alleged to have been driven at a high speed and had knocked down the deceased who died as a result of the injuries sustained. A claim petition was preferred before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandya, by the widow in which she cited the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Ltd., as respondent-4 in its capac...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Ranjit Commercial Enterprises Vs. P.R. Ashokanand S/O Late P. Ram ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Kant1; ILR1995KAR653; 1995(3)KarLJ32
ORDER1. The petitioner -- a Madras based Private Limited Company, assails the impugned order of eviction passed in respect of a guest house maintained by it at Bangalore which is used for occupation of its two Directors during their occasional visit to the city.2. The petitioner has filed I.A. No. V for admitting certain correspondences entered into between the parties relating to the petition premises as additional evidence. The respondent has also filed a petition along with an affidavit disclosing certain subsequent events. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar v. Kesho Ram : AIR1992SC700 the learned Counsel appearing for the contesting parties do not object to taking into account the facts emerging from the said petitions. Therefore, I am taking notice of those facts as well.3. The respondent-landlord at present is residing in a house owned by his wife. The said house consists of two bed-rooms, a hall and dining room with kitchen. His fa...
Tag this Judgment!F.C.S. Amalnathan and Others Vs. J.S. Victor Basco
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Kant258; I(1995)DMC468; ILR1995KAR869; 1995(2)KarLJ518
ORDER1. This petition is filed by two petitioners under Section 301 of the Indian Succession Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for removing or suspending the respondent from the joint executorships of the will dated 12-10-1983 left by one Flora Swamidoss and to place the estate in the hands of the petitioners.2. The petitioners case put forth in the petition in brief is as hereunder: Miss. Flora Swamidoss has executed a will dated 12-10-1983 in respect of her assets and has appointed the petitioners and the respondent as the executors of her will. After the death of the testatrix the respondent took possession of all the moveables including gold jewels and silver and stainless steel articles, clothes, etc, without reference to the petitioners, put them in one room and locked that room and has thereby deprived access to the petitioner. The respondent and his wife took away gold jewels from one of the beneficiaries forcibly and are misusing them. The respondent has been himself ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »