Karnataka Court January 1998 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. Samboji Rao Vs. Oriental Insurance Company, Bangalore and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: [1999(81)FLR575]; 1998(3)KarLJ280; (1999)ILLJ222Kant
1. This appeal by the owner of the lorry bearing registration No. CNS 5837 is directed against the judgment and award dated 27-8-1986 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Tumkur in W.C.A.C.R. No. 13 of 1985 on his file in so far as it relates to the penalty of Rs. 11,532-40 ps. made payable by the owner of the lorry.2. There is no quarrel between the parties as to the compensation amount awarded. But the appellant who is the owner of the lorry and 'the employer of Nazir Ahmed has challenged the penalty levied on him under Section 4-A(3) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation.3. Sri K. Prabhakar, learned Counsel for the appellant contended before me that the impugned award in so far as it relates to levy of the penalty is bad in law in as much as the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation has not exercised his discretion judicially in levying the penalty and without giving opportunity to the appella...
State of Karnataka Vs. Ravi and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALT(Cri)195; 1998(3)KarLJ274
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. We have heard the learned State Public Prosecutor at some length in this matter because it represents what we would liketo categorize as a very unfortunate and sorry state of affairs. The offence is a relatively serious one since the charge is under Section 326, Indian Penal Code and grievous injuries had been caused to the victims. Also, it appears from the little material that we have on record that the accused seem to be the rowdies from the area. In this background, it is more than incumbent that when they have assaulted two persons and caused such injuries that the law must bring them to book. They were apprehended, they were arrested by the Police and a charge-sheet put up before the Court being C.C. No. 6154 of 1991. The case was not disposed of for a long period of six years and the order dated 9th-April, 1997 passed by the learned III Addl. C.M.M., Bangalore City, records the fact that initially, summons were issued for production of the witnesses, thereaft...
Smt. B.K. Parvathamma Vs. Bangalore Development Authority, Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)KarLJ57
ORDER1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing theorder Annexure-L dated nil, as per copy to the writ petition and praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to grant sale deed in favour of the petitioner.2. This case by itself is a sample to exhibit how our institutions under the Constitution are forgetting the concept of justice social, economic and political at times have caused social injustice against poor and downtrodden people. The people, who belong to the weaker sections not simply based on castes, but those suffering from economic disability.3. The petitioner's case is that petitioner was allotted site bearing No. 652, 4th Block, West of Chord Road, 3rd Stage measuring East to West 20 feet and North to South 25 feet, more specifically described in the schedule. The grant certificate was issued on 12-8-1975, copy of which is Annexure-A and the possession certificate...
M/S. Vyalikaval House Building Co-operative Society, Bangalore Vs. Smt ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ143
R.P. Sethi, J.1. As all these appeals involve the same question of law and similar facts, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Relevant facts have been extracted from W.A. No. 506 of 1996 arising out of W.P. No. 8194 of 1987.The writ petitioner in that case had challenged the acquisition made by the State Government under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the 'Act') insofar as it related to her property. Similarly, in other writ petitions the respondents herein had challenged the acquisition with respect to the lands belonging to them.One of the grounds urged by the writ petitioners was that the appellant-Society had acquired vast extent of land, which did not serve any public purpose and that the office bearers of the appellant-Society were making huge profits at the expense of the writ petitioners and others similarly situated. The lands, the subject-matter of the present litigation, had been acquired under the Act vide final notification issued on 21st of Fe...
State Vs. Ravi and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4363
M.F. Saldhana, J.1. We have heard the learned SPP at some length in this matter because it represents what we would like to categorize as a very unfortunate and sorry state of affairs. The offence is a relatively serious one since the charge is under Section 326, IPC and grievous injuries had been caused to the victims. Also, it appears from the little material that we have on record that the accused seem to be the rowdies from the area. In this background, it is more than incumbent that when they have assaulted two persons and caused such injuries that the law must bring them to book. They were apprehended, they were arrested by the Police and a charge-sheet put up before the Court being C.C. No. 6154/91. The case was not disposed of for a long period of six years and the order dated 9th April 1997 passed by the learned III Addl. C.M.M., Bangalore City, records the fact that initially, summons were issued for production of the witnesses, thereafter warrants were issued and then non-ba...
Smt. Jayamma Vs. C. Munikrishnappa and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-15-1998
Reported in: I(1998)ACC424; 1998ACJ1165; [1998(79)FLR55]; 1998(2)KarLJ555
1. The Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Kolar has awarded the compensation of Rs. 89,084/- in favour of respondents 1 and 2-Claimants for the death of one Shasikumar who was driving the taxi under the employment of the appellant. The respondents 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased-Shasikumar. In addition to awarding the compensation, the Commissioner has also directed the appellant to pay the penalty of Rs. 30,000/- and the interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the compensation amount of Rs. 89,084/-. Being aggrieved by this the present appeal arises.2. Mr. R.S. Ravi, learned Counsel for the appellants submits that imposing of penalty and interest on the appellant is contrary to law and facts of the case. On the other hand Mr. H.G. Ramesh, learned Counsel for R-3-Insurance Company submitted that the death of the said Shasikumar did not arise in the course of the employment. He also filed cross objections to that effect and according to him the finding of the Commissioner is erro...
State of Karnataka Vs. Krishna @ Challakili and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-15-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1665; ILR1998KAR1131; 1998(3)KarLJ128
1. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor has advanced a very valid argument in this case wherein he points out that the offence was one under Section 394, Indian Penal Code in so far as the two accused are alleged to have snatched a Mangalasutra worth Rs. 2,500/- and cash worth Rs. 250/- from Smt. Vasantha near the Binny Mills Railway Bridge at Bangalore City. Learned Counsel submitted that in this case, the accused were apprehended and some property was recovered at their instance and he submitted that this recovery alone was sufficient to establish their guilt. Furthermore, his contention is that unfortunately, the main evidence of Smt. Vasantha is not before the Court because even though summons and a non-bailable warrant was issued, the prosecution apparently did not produce her. Irrespective of the non-production of the complainant, the learned State Public Prosecutor submitted that these are serious anti-social offences and that not only should the Courts be extremely pa...
Canara Bank, Arsikere Vs. B.E. Siddappa and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-15-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)KarLJ246
1. There is delay of 93 days in filing the appeal. I do not find any convincing reasons to accept the delay. LA. I is dismissed.2. Even otherwise on merits I find that the Courts below has given 6% interest under Order 34, Rule 11(b) which reads as follows:'(b) subsequent interest upto the date of realisation or actual payment on the: aggregate of the principal sums specified in clause (a) as calculated in accordance with that clause at such rate as the Court deems reasonable'.In a case coming under Order 34, Rule 11(b), the Court is empowered to grant subsequent interest at reasonable rate. The Court below has held that 6% is reasonable rate of interest and there is no reason for this Court to come to a different conclusion.3. Therefore, in any event of the matter, there is absolutely no merit In the appeal. Therefore, both the appeal as well as the application arc dismissed....
The Divisional Controller, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-15-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)KarLJ288
ORDER1. For proved misconduct in a domestic enquiry, the first respondent-Conductor in the petitioner-KSRTC was dismissed from service. In the adjudication of the industrial dispute raised by the first respondent, he conceded the fairness of the domestic enquiry. The Labour Court found that the finding with regard to proof of charge, as reached by the Disciplinary Authority, was perverse. The Labour Court set aside the order of dismissal and directed reinstatement of the first respondent in service with continuity of service and other consequential benefits, but with only 50 per cent of back wages, by its award dated 7-2-1997 at Annexure-A. In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, petitioner-KSRTC seeks quashing of the said award at Annexure-A.2. The Labour Court has appreciated the evidence before the Enquiring Authority in a thoroughly wrong manner in coming to the conclusion that the finding with regard to proof of charge was perverse. The charge was tha...
State Through the Police Inspector, Mundgod Police Station, Mundgod Vs ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-13-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALT(Cri)191; ILR1999KAR1592; 1998(3)KarLJ271
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This is a case in which the facts are rather gruesome. There is little dispute about the guilt of the accused because the husband who was facing trial virtually pleaded guilty on the murder charge of having assaulted his wife with an axe as a result of which she died on the spot. In the light of the settled legal position that it is unsafe to record a conviction on the basis of a plea of guilty in a murder trial, the learned Sessions Judge very correctly recorded the evidence, evaluated it and convicted the accused because the prosecution had proved the charge beyond reasonable doubt irrespective of the plea of guilty. This, in our considered view is, the correct procedure to be followed. The learned Trial Judge, however, for a variety of reasons that have been recorded, the main one is being that it was established that there was a quarrel between the spouses and that the accused flew into a rage as a result of which he turned violent and hit the wife with an axe, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »