Karnataka Court November 1996 Judgments
C.B. Solanki, Major, Proprietor, Fancy Silk Centre Vs. Srikanta Parash ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-29-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT(Cri)912; 1997CriLJ3051; ILR1997KAR1545; 1997(2)KarLJ500
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23-3-1991 passed by the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City, whereby the said Magistrate was pleased to acquit the respondents/accused. 2. I heard the learned counsel, Sri Belliyappa for Sri A. K. Subbaiah, appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel, Sri C. V. Nagesh, appearing for the respondents/accused. I have also perused the case records. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows : Originally the appellant had filed a private complaint under Sections 190(a) and 200 of Criminal Procedure Code as against the respondents/accused herein and seven other person for the offence under Sections 499, 500, 501, and 502 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The learned VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (hereinafter called as the 'MAGISTRATE' has taken the cognizance of the said offence as against all the said accused persons and registered a case in CC No. 2294/1982 and issued the proce...
Tag this Judgment!Harihar Polyfibers and Another Vs. the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Have ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-29-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT(Cri)946; 1997CriLJ2731; ILR1997KAR1139
ORDER1. These two petitions came to be filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. questioning the very jurisdiction of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, to take action under Sec. 133, Cr.P.C. for the alleged offence of polluting air and water and preventing public nuisance. Since common question of law in involved, these two petitions are disposed of by this order. Retain copy of this order in each file. 2. The brief facts of the case are that in Cr.P.C. 410/88 the petitioners are units of Grasim Industries Ltd., formerly known as the Gualior Rayon Silk . They have put up its two Units known as Harihar Polyfibers and Grasilene Dvn. on the left Bank of Tungabhadra river at Kumarapatnam near Harihar in Dharwad Dist. The Unit Harihar Polyfibers which produces pulp was commissioned in the year 1972. The other Unit Grasilene Division was set up in the year 1977 to produce high performance fibre from wood publp. The 2nd respondent filed a complaint before the 1st respondent making allegation of water and...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. N. Renuka and ors. Vs. Dr. Vijaya T. Belgaumkar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-29-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR318; 1997(2)KarLJ521
ORDERS. Rajendra Babu, J1. This petition is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenging an order made by the Court of Small Causes, Bangalore. An Eviction Petition was filed by the respondent under Section 21(1)(a) & (h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act. An order of eviction exparte was passed against the petitioner. The petitioner preferred a miscellaneous petition under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure to restore the petition. During the pendency of those proceedings an application was filed under Section 29 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act stating that the petitioner has not paid the rents or deposited the same in Court as and when they became due and therefore action should be taken under Section 29(4) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act. The Trial Court considered the said application. In opposition to the said application the petitioner stated a sum of Rs. 85,000/- is still in deposit with him and therefore that sum could be adjusted towards, ...
Tag this Judgment!Mandya Rural Police Vs. Ravi @ Ravikumar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-29-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR1228
Chidananda Ulial, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.8.1991 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and CJM, Mandya, in CO No. 92/ 89 acquitting the respondent/accused. The State has preferred the instant appeal with the leave as against the acquittal.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:That the respondent/accused being the driver of matador van bearing registration No. CAA 5121 drove the same on M.C. Road near Thobinakere village in a high speed in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger the human lives and as a result of the same he dashed the matador van to a road side tree caused simple injuries to grievous injuries to many passengers who had traveled in the said matador van and further caused the death of one Marigowda, also a passenger in the matador van, that immediately after the accident, the respondent/accused instead of giving first aid to the injured persons, sped away from the place of accident. That the jurisdictional police had regis...
Tag this Judgment!Nellikkottu Kolleriyil Madhavi Vs. Kavakkalathil Kalikutty and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-29-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR2632
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. We have heard learned counsel on both sides.3. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment and decree of the Kerala High Court dated 24,5.1993, made in SA.No. 368 of 1989. The respondents had purchased the Plaint Schedule property in execution of the decrees in OS No. 262 of 1955 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Parappanagadi. The sale certificate, Exh. A-2 dated 28.1.1958 was given to the respondents. They had also filed an application for delivery of possession of the property which had come to be delivered under Exh. A-3 dated 21.7.1961. After taking delivery of the possession on 20.10.1961, they assigned the Plaint Schedule property to the plaintiff. Under those circumstances, the question arises whether they are entitled to a decree of perpetual injunction, restraining the appellant from interfering with his possession. Though the trial Court and the appellate Court had accepted the case of the appellants, the High Court has point...
Tag this Judgment!D.M. Ramachandra Rao Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-28-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR1555
ORDERB.K. Sangalad, J. 1. This L.R.R.P is filed against the order of the Appellate Authority, Mandya District, Mandya, dated 20.1.1990 passed in Appeal No. 61/ 88 dismissing the appeal and confirming the order of the Land Tribunal, Mandya, dated 6.1.88 in LRF. INA 64/83-84.2, The petitioner filed Form No. 1 for grant of occupancy rights in respect of Sy. No. 850 measuring 1 acre 2 guntas and Sy. No. 839 measuring 25' x 25'. The Appellant No. 2 claimed the tenancy under this petitioner. The Land Tribunal, Mandya, after holding an enquiry rejected the prayer of the petitioner and another. Being aggrieved by the order of the Land Tribunal, an appeal was preferred before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority also dismissed the appeal Now the petitioner who was Appellant No. 1 has filed this petition for not granting the occupancy rights in respect of Sy. No. 850 measuring 1 acre 02 guntas.3. At the very out-set it should be made clear that it is a non-agricultural land. Mr. P.S....
Tag this Judgment!Shankar Appayya Govakar Vs. Nurudappa Basappa Mali and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-28-1996
Reported in: II(1998)ACC575
Hari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This claimant's appeal arises out of the judgment and award dated 19.10.1991, delivered in the Motor Accidents Claim M.V.C. No. 1416 of 1988, whereby the Tribunal No. III, Belgaum has granted and awarded, in total, a sum of Rs. 16,000/- as global compensation to the claimant with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realisation and directed that the respondents 1 to 3, shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation awarded and it further directed that as regards remaining 50% of the amount of compensation awarded shall be payable jointly and severally by respondents 4 and 5 to the claim petition.2. The facts of the case in brief are that on the date of occurrence, that is 11.12.1988, tine claimant-appellant was a pillion rider on Scooter Bajaj -- CLT 2626 from Belgaum Market to Kanabargi which was being run in a moderate speed. When the scooter reached the spot of accident at about 9.45 p.m....
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Dharward Vs. R.H. Gudagnur an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-27-1996
Reported in: (1997)IILLJ560Kant
ORDER1. Petitioner, Karnataka Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Dharwad, in this petition filed under Arts. 226/227 of the Constitution of India, has called in attention the order of the Industrial Tribunal, Hubli, dated April 30, 1987 (Annexure-P) and July 17, 1987 (Annexure-A) in Serial Application Nos. 10 and 11/86, holding that the domestic enquiry held against the respondents is not legal and fair and rejecting-their applications seeking approval of order of dismissal of the respondents dated September 22, 1986 under See. 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 2. Brief facts are, Respondentsand-1 and 2 were working under the petitioner-Bank as Junior Bank Inspector and Assistant Manager respectively and they were deputed to work in the Taluk Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Society (TAPCMS) with effect from February 1, 1973 and March 24, 1973 respectively. It is stated in the petition that during their services under the establishment of TAPCMS, respondents were involved i...
Tag this Judgment!Secretary, New Mangalore Port and Dock Workers' Union Vs. Central Indu ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-27-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR892
ORDERM.P. Chinnappa, J1. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the order passed by the Central Industrial Tribunal rejecting the reference made by the Central Government to consider the question which reads:'Keeping in view the nature of the duties and responsibilities of the Assistant Marine Surveyors working in New Mangalore Port , Trust, Panambur, whether the action of the Management of New Mangalore Port Trust, Panambur, in fixing a less scale of Rs. 750-1251 to the Assistant Marine Surveyor in New Managalore Port Trust is justified. If not, to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled?'After considering the plea and also the evidence let in by the parties, the 1st respondent rejected the reference. Hence the petitioner filed this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The brief facts of the case are that the Mangalore Port was 'started in 1963. in 1980 it came to be named as New Mangalore Port Trust. Subsequently Pay Commissioner hiked the ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Manjog Builders, Bangalore Vs. Vyalikaval Co-operative Housing So ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-26-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR1223; 1998(1)KarLJ495
ORDER1. The petitioner claims to be in possession of the land bearing Survey Nos. 181 and 182 of Bilakahalli Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, measuring 1 acre 34 guntas and 1 acre 13 guntas respectively under the agreement of sale dated 24-8-1984.2. The aforesaid lands were proposed for acquisition by the preliminary notification dated 12-8-1986 issued under Section4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'). The said notification was followed by a final notification dated 24-9-1987. These notifications are challenged by the petitioner in this petition.3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the State contended that the petitioner cannot maintain the writ petition as he had no title to the property as on the date of preliminary notification. In reply to this submission the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in possession of the land measuring 1 acre 34 guntas and 1 acre 13 guntas in Survey Numbers 181 and 182 respec...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »