Karnataka Court April 1997 Judgments

T. Dinakar Vs. P.J. Jagadish and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2000ACJ228

Hari Nath Tilhari, J.1. These appeals arise from a common judgment and award dated 30.8.1993, given by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore (Mr. S.B. Chanal) Member & I Additional District Judge, Mangalore in Motor Vehicle Case Nos. 94, 205 and 256 of 1989, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,16,000 in M.V.C. No. 94 of 1989 in favour of claimants of that case to be shared equally and compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,08,000 in M.V.C. No. 205 of 1989 in favour of the claimant jointly against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in the case and for a sum of Rs. 30,400 in M.V.C. No. 256 of 1989, but it directed the insurance company to indemnify the owners of the vehicle and fastened the liability for payment of the compensation on the respondents in each motor vehicle case, jointly and severally. The amount of compensation in each case has been awarded as mentioned above with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of applic...

Abdur Rahman and ors. Vs. Athifa Begum and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1998KAR1284; 1997(3)KarLJ570

Chidananda Ullal, J.1.This R.F.A. is directed against the Judgment and Decree dt. 30.6.92 in O.S.No. 3879/84 on the file of the Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, whereby the said City Civil Judge had dismissed the suit of the Appellants.2. I heard the learned Counsel for the appellants Sri Ilyas Hussain and Sri Anand appearing for M/s. Rego and Rego for the respondent No. 1 Respondents No. 2 to 4 are served with notice but they remained absent. 3. The facts in brief of the case are as follows : The appellants herein had originally filed O.S.No. 3879/84 on the file of the Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore (hereinafter for convenience referred to as the City Civil Judge), for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule 'A' movable properties and suit schedule 'B' immovable property. In the plaint of the appellants the suit schedule 'A' movable and suit schedule 'B' immovable properties are described as follows : SCHEDULE - 'A'Movables1. Wooden and Iron Furniture wor...

M/S. Gateway Hotels and Gateway Resorts Limited, Bangalore Vs. Nagarah ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ63

R.P. Sethi, C.J.1. With the proclaimed object of protecting the wildlife and preserving the ecology, the respondents alleged the violation of The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, hereinafter called the 'Wildlife Act' and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, hereinafter called as the 'Forest Act', and filed the writ petition challenging the validity of various Government Orders culminating in the lease deed at Annexure-F, contending that the same was illegal, void and inoperative. It was prayed that direction be issued to the respondents to forbear from taking up any project for non-forest purpose within the Rajiv Gandhi National Park, Nagarahole, and to direct the respondents to forthwith take all measures to restore the source of livelihood to the displaced tribals of Nagarhole National Park and to involve them in enriching the bio-culture of the National Park. The writ petition was allowed with the direction to the appellants in W.A. No. 1333 of 1997, M/s. Gateway Hotels and Gateway ...

G.R. Bhagavanta Goudar Vs. the Registrar, Uchcha Siksha Aur Sodh Sanst ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1998(1)KarLJ719

ORDER1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the legality of the order, dated 12-12-1995, by which he has been transferred from Dharwad to Madras (Annexure-C).2. The questions to be considered herein are.-(i) Whether the petitioner is an employee of the Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha; (ii) Whether he had been appointed to a cadre of librarians and posted at Dharwad or his appointment was to the post at Dharwad only; (iii) Whether, under the terms of employment of the petitioner, his post was transferable either expressly or even impliedly. 3. Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha (in short 'the Sabha') is a society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (for brevity 'Societies Act'). The constitution of Sabha specifically provides that its head office shall be at Madras. This society was established in the year 1918 under the inspiring guidance and Presidentship of Mahathma Gandhi, for spreading the hindi language among the non-...

Ravi Namdev Kavale and anr. Vs. Kittaswami and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1998ACJ1361; ILR1998KAR98

ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. In the application for condonation of delay it has been stated, by the deponent that he, is an illiterate person and he did not know about the limitation for filing the appeal before the Hon'ble High Court. In paragraph-3 it is stated 'It is submitted that I am an illiterate person and did not know about the limitation for filing the Appeal before this Hon'ble Court. Only when my friend who met with an accident in the same accident had informed me about the same, then only i understand. After making some financial arrangements for the expenses to be incurred for filing the Appeal, I came to Bangalore without making further delay and instructed my Counsel for filing the same before this Hon'ble Court. Hence there is some delay which is due to above mentioned bonafide reasons and not intentional one.' No counter affidavit has been filed controverting these allegations. Therefore there appea...

H.M. Revanna Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1998(1)ALT(Cri)365; 1997CriLJ4627; 1997(4)KarLJ76

ORDER1. The petitioner herein has questioned the proceedings in S.C. No. 63/90 on the file of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural Dist. for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 342, 353, 506, 307 and 427 IPC in so far as it relates to the petitioner. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Circle Inspector of Police Magadi Police Station submitted charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections referred to above in C.C. No. 224/1985 on the file of the J.M.F.C. at Magadi. The learned Magistrate passed an order on 4-8-1990 under Section 209 committing the entire case to the Court of Sessions on the ground that offence under Section 307 is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, as against the A-1 to A-106 as per the separate list enclosed to the order. This order is questioned by the petitioner herein. Though petitioner has raised several contentions in this petition at the time of the arguments, it is restricted to only one question...

The Karnataka Kerosene Retail Dealers' Federation, Bangalore Vs. State ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1997KAR1988; 1998(2)KarLJ569

ORDER1. Kerosene is an essential commodity and like food grains, sugar etc., it is distributed from licenced fair price depots throughout the State of Karnataka. The grant of licences for distribution of these commodities is regulated by the Karnataka Essential Commodities Licensing Order, 1986, which envisages a 3 tier system of distribution viz., wholesale dealers, retail dealers and hawkers. The wholesale dealers are entitled to sell one or more of the essential commodities specified in the schedule to other dealers or to bulk consumers whereas a retail dealer is a person who is not a wholesale dealer but is authorised to trade in articles mentioned in the said schedule. A hawker on the other hand is a person, who carries kerosene from place to place for sale to persons other than a dealer. The authorities, it appears, noticed that retail kerosene licensees were selling kerosene by engaging hawkers and bullock carts, which was against the policy of issuing retail licences. It was fe...

Sulaiman K. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17-4-1995 in Sessions Case No. 1/1994. The accused stood charged with having committed the double murder of his younger sister Avvamma as also of one Challappa with whom she is alleged to have been in love. According to the prosecution case, deceased Avvamma was only about 16 years old and she was working with PW9. Challappa was also employed by PW9 and the two of them got friendly with each other and decided to get married. It is necessary to point out that Avvamma and Challappa belonged to two different communities and obviously, quite apart from this aspect of the matter there was one other factor which may not have been very conducive to the proposed marriage, namely the fact that Challappa was aged 30 years and there was a big age difference also between the two of them. On 7-9-1993 the accused who was the brother of the girl, is alleged to have been searching for her and he finally located them in the house of PWs 5 ...

Mittal Steel Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1997(58)ECC110; 1998(98)ELT606(Kar); ILR1997KAR1900

ORDER1. Petitioner, a company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956, is before this Court mainly seeking a direction to the second respondent herein to consider and dispose of the appeal in No. 622/96(B) or in the alternative to dispose of the stay petition filed along with the appeal. The other relief sought in the writ petition is to quash the order of detention passed by third respondent dated 4-3-1997. 2. Briefly the back ground facts are, the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore, had passed an order of adjudication for the period 1-4-1994 to 31-3-1995 and had imposed excise duty under Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the Act for short) in a sum of Rs. 38,29,868/- and a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- by his order dated 14-5-1996. Disturbed by this order, petitioner has preferred an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) Bangalore. Along with the appeal, petitioner has also filed an application for waiver of pre-deposit for entertaining the appeal. The appeal and the applicati...

Management of Mysore Panels and Boards Pvt. Ltd., Thandavapura, Mysore ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1997(3)KarLJ618

ORDERV.P. Mohan Kumar, J. 1. The petitioner herein impugns Annexure-B and C-proceedings of the respondent. Annexure-B is the order passed by the respondent after enquiry under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Annexure-C is the consequential notice issued. The contention of the petitioner is that the period of infancy available to the petitioner is to be reckoned from the date of manufacture i.e, June 30, 1992 and not July 18, 1991 as now assigned. 2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows : The petitioner-establishment, according to the petitioner was established to manufacture plywood and other articles. The factory, according to the petitioner, comes within the ambit of Section 1(3)(a) of the Act. It is not a commercial establishment which is coverable under Section 1(3)(b). The respondent herein initiated proceedings for coverage under the Act reckoning the alleged sale took place on Ju...