Karnataka Court August 1996 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.
S. Mahesha Vs. the Bangalore Development Authority, Bangalore and Anot ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ54
R.P. Sethi, C.J.1. On his alleged failure to pay the balance amount in respect of auction Site No. 581 at BSK III Stage, layout, the appellant was served with the show-cause notice as to why the auction sale made in his favour should not be cancelled and action be taken as per Bangalore Development Authority (Disposal of Sites) Rules, 1984 (hereinafter called the 'Rules'). After consideration of his reply the respondents declined to send a copy of the confirmation letter afresh and rejected his prayer for allotment of the site referred to herein above.2. The writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed on the ground that as the appellant had not deposited the balance of the bid amount within 45 days from the date of confirmation no relief could be granted to him in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court.3. It is conceded before us that after the allotment of the auctioned Site No. 581, BSK III Stage, layout, the appellant had deposited a sum of Rs. 1,05,000/- on 15-2-199...
Syndicate Bank Vs. A.V. Angadi and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR1042; 1997(2)KarLJ572
ORDERKirshna Moorthy, J. 1. The plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money on a mortgage is the Appellant. The first defendant is a Registered Partnership Firm, of which, defendants 2 to 6 are its partners. Defendants 7 and 8 are impleaded as their Co-obligates with defendants 1 to 6 who have executed necessary loan documents along with Defendants 1 to 6 in favour of the plaintiff-Bank.2. According to the plaint allegations, defendant No. 1 - the partnership firm and its partners defendants 2 to 6 entered into an agreement with the Food Corporation of India on 29.1.1977 to construct two Godowns of 2500 tonnes capacity each on the specifications laid down by the Food Corporation of India. They had agreed to complete the construction of the two godowns in their land on Gadag-Hubli Road and give delivery to Food Corporation of India within six months from the date of signing of the agreement. For the above purpose, defendants requested the plaintiff-Bank for giving financial aid to be rele...
The Secretary, Departmental Examination Board, Karnataka Electricity B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ189
1. Having failed in the departmental examination, S.A.S. Part-II held in the month of August 1991, the respondent-I herein filed a writ petition in this Court for issuance of appropriate directions to get his papers re-evaluated as he had expected more marks than awarded to him. During the pendency of the writ, answer paper No. IV pertaining to Commercial Accounting System and Internal Audit was got re-evaluated by the Examiner but the respondent 1 did not pass. On his prayer Sri Sadanand, Advocate, who had served as Deputy Accountant General before his retirement was appointed as a Commissioner/Evaluator and on the basis of his report the writ petitioner was declared to have passed the examination in the aforesaid paper vide the judgment impugned in this appeal.2. Some of the facts necessary to be noticed for disposal of the appeal are that the Karnataka Electricity Board has prescribed several departmental examinations for various categories of posts existing in the Electricity Board...
M.G. Achappa Vs. the Prescribed Officer, Gonikoppal Grama Panchayat an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR2546; 1996(5)KarLJ555
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. The Writ Petition was taken-up for final hearing with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties and is being disposed on the merits at this stage.2. The Notification No. Election:42:94-95, dated 11.12.1995, relating to three Village Panchayats viz., Kushalnagar, Ponnampet and Gonikoppal, issued for the purposes of electing President and Vice-President was cancelled except in relation to Kushalnagar Village Panchayat vide order of the 2nd respondent dated 10.1.1996. The petitioner who was the only candidate for the election of the President earlier reserved for backward classes has challenged the action of the respondents in this petition with prayer to quash the impugned order and for issuance of direction to the respondent-1 to hold Elections of Adhyaksha and Upadakshya of the 3rd respondent Gram panchayat on the basis of the earlier notification dated 28th December 1995 (Annexure-B). It is contended that after the issuance of the notification by the R...
Powerflow Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Addl. Labour Court and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: [1996(74)FLR2273]; ILR1996KAR2553
R.P. Sethi, C.J.1. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties the appeals were heard at length on merits at the initial stage of admission and being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Under the cloak of technicalities and procedural wrangles the respondents-workmen are intended to be deprived of their two times bread and thereby forced to starvation. The appellants with hands in gloves with their sister-concern have left no stone unturned in unnecessarily dragging the workmen to litigation with apparently oblique motive of tiring them in their genuine struggle of remaining alive. The appellants are shown to have succeeded in depriving the respondents-workmen from getting any job w.e.f.26.9.94, the day when they ventured to go on strike. Not deterred by the order of the Labour Court passed under Section.33C of the Industrial Disputes Act and of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 38720-38744/95, the appellants have ventured to file the present appeal with the ...
B. Shamasundar and ors. Vs. University of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR2533; 1996(6)KarLJ628
R.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Alleging discrimination the appellants filed Writ Petitions praying for issuance of direction to the respondent to retire them only after the competition of the age of 60 years as they claim to be included in the expression of 'teacher' in Clause 3(1) of the Mysore University Employees (Conditions of Service) Statutes, 1984 of the University of Mysore. In the alternative it is prayed that the aforesaid Clause of the University Statute be declared unconstitutional, being violative of Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India. Relying upon a Division Bench judgement of this Court in UNIVERSITY OF MYSORE v. P. MARIBASAVARADYA, : ILR1990KAR3671 , the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petitions vide the judgment impugned in these appeals.2. The appellants in these appeals who are Humanities Editor, Sub-Editor, Deputy Editor, Ephigraphical Assistant, Deputy Librarian, Assistant Librarian and Library Assistants, employed in the respondent-University claimed that in vie...
Sri G. C. Prabhuswamy Vs. Special Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur and Othe ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-05-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR192; 1997(1)KarLJ261
ORDER1. The challenge in this writ petition is against an order issued by the 3rd Respondent-Commissioner for Religious and Charitable Endowments, dated 4-10-1982 creating the post of an Additional Archak for performance of pooja and other functions in what is known as Sri Channabasavcswara Swamy Temple at Gubbi. An appeal preferred against the said order before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal at Bangalore having failed, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition assailing the order of Commissioner as also that passed by the Tribunal.2. The challenge arises in the background of the following facts:'Sri. Channabasaveswara Swamy Temple' at Gubbi is a Muzarai Institution, and comprises two temples one within the town at Gubbi and the other outside the town limits. The main temple called Gaddige is said to be located outside the town, while the smaller temple called Ulsavmurthy is located inside the town. With the increase in the number of devotees visiting the two tem...
Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board Vs. the Manager Vijaya Bank and Anoth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-05-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR1357
Kumar Rajaratnam, J. 1. The petitioner is the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board. The petitioner challenges the order passed by the Additional Civil Judge, in Miscellaneous Appeal Nos. 48 and 49 of 1989 arising out of the orders in I.A. Nos. VIII and IV in O.S. Nos. 461 and 635 of 1987 on the file of the Principal Munsif, Hubli. 2. It is stated that a contract was entered into between the petitioner and the second respondent. The contract was on a turn-key basis for completion of a project that was to be handed over to the second respondent. It is also stated that the second respondent having defaulted with respect to certain terms of the contract, the petitioner was obliged to rescind the contract. As per terms of the contract, the second respondent was directed to deposit the amount given by way of Bank Guarantee. 3. The second respondent first approached the Madhya Pradesh Arbitration Tribunal and obtained an injunction against the petitioner from invoking the Bank Guarantee. An exper...
Medical Officer, Govt. Ayurvedic Dispensary and anr. Vs. Mysore Dist. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-05-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR808
ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This is a review application under Order 47 Rule 1 from the order dated 6.4.1993 passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty dismissing the applicant's Civil revision.2. This review application has been filed on the ground that this Hon'ble Court ought to have seen that the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent was not maintainable as the Small Causes Court has no jurisdiction to maintain the said suit. The said suit should have been entertained as a mere case under the category of suits excepted from the cognisance of Court of Small Causes as per Section 8 of the Karnataka Small Causes Courts Amendment Act, 1976, and also as per the entry at Sl.No. 1 of the schedule of the said Act which has been quoted as,'a suit concerning in act done or purporting to be done by or by order of the Central Government or the State Government.'It has nowhere been stated even in the review application that was the ground taken before the Learned Judge while revision ...
Kamat Hotel Vs. Karnataka Electricity Board and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-02-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)KarLJ525
ORDERTirath Singh Thakur, J.1. This Writ Petition calls in question an order dated 24th January 1991 whereby the second respondent - Assistant Executive Engineer has determined a sum of Rs. 27,775/- as due and payable by the petitioner on account of the alleged slow recording of the electric energy consumed through the meter installed in the premises. The challenge arises in the following background:2. The vigilance squad of the respondent - Board visited the hotel premises of the petitioner at Hubli and carried out a check of the meter installed in the premises for recording the electrical energy consumed. The result of the meter calibration carried out by the squad is said to have disclosed that the meter was recording 35.25% less of the energy actually consumed on account of an improper contact in the middle phase of the CT Wire (Current Transfer Wire). The error it is claimed by the Board was rectified, but based on the meter testing report as well as the report of the vigilance sq...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›