Karnataka Court December 1998 Judgments
Smt. Vanaja and Another Vs. State by Banaswadi Police, Bangalore City
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD(Cri)402; 2000(1)KarLJ85
1. These two appeals are interconnected as they are filed to challenge the common judgment and order dated 6-2-1998 in S.C. No. 28 of 1994 passed by the IV Additional District Judge, Mayo Hall (CCH No. 21), in passing whereof, the learned Sessions Judge while convicting and sentencing the appellant 1 and 2 in the first appeal (they were accused 1 and 2 in the Sessions case) for imprisonment for life, he had acquitted the respondents 1 and 2 (they were accused 3 and 4 in the Sessions Case) in the second appeal.2. The first appeal is filed by the accused 1 and 2-convicts to challenge their conviction and sentence for life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The second appeal is filed by the State to challenge the same insofar as the same related to the acquittal of the accused 3 and 4 of the said offences.3. In the first appeal, the appellant 1 is represented by the learned Counsel Sri Thimmarayappa whereas the appellant 2 therein is represented by Mr. Tomy Se...
Tag this Judgment!P.A. Kulkarni and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR869; 1999(1)KarLJ706
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Careless conduct and casual approach adopted by the respondent-State in the matter of fundamental right dealing with life and safety forced the petitioners, belonging to a noble profession of advocates to put off their robes and stand before us as litigants seeking justice for the legal heirs of the dead and compensation for the injured. The deaths and injuries are admitted to have been caused on account of the collapse of a building constructed by the builders by using sub-standard material besides ignoring the structural guidelines and protections. The rolling tears and the soar wailing cries of the victims of the tragedy did not affect the mighty and careless State but did touch the tender hearts of the petitioners, who initiated this action in public interest with prayer for granting appropriate relief to the needy and deserving. This Court has been moved to take appropriate action by the issuance of requisite directions in furtherance of its obligation to p...
Tag this Judgment!Dalit Sena, Karnataka Vs. the Karnatak University, Dharwad and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)KarLJ1
ORDER1. Claiming to be the champions of the cause of the Dalits, the petitioner-Association has filed this petition with prayer for quashing the advertisement dated 30th of September, 1996 and the corrigendum dated 20th of October, 1996, Annexures-J and K with a further prayer to direct the respondent-University to re-advertise the posts by following the Roster System as contemplated under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India and by clearly indicating the posts which are reserved and the posts which are not reserved in the fresh advertisement notification.2. The Government of Karnataka is stated to have issued Roster System vide notifications issued from time to time, that is, 12-2-1989, 27-2-1989, 5-11-1994, 13-1-1995 and 21-6-1995. The said Roster System has been directed to be followed by all educational institutions including the Universities. In the year 1994, the Registrar of the respondent-University is stated to have issued an advertisement with respect to the posts sough...
Tag this Judgment!Vishwabharathi House Building Co-operative Society Limited, Bangalore ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: [2000]101CompCas38(Kar); 1999(2)KarLJ38
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Feeling personally aggrieved by notice dated 9-9-1996 issued by the City Civil Court (CCH No. 18), District Courts, Bangalore, the petitioner has ignited the process of this Court in the name of public interest litigation praying for quashing of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Central Act No. 68 of 1986) (hereinafter called as 'Act'). The Act has been termed to be unconstitutional being violative of the provisions of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution. It is, further, submitted that the Act has been passed without jurisdiction. It is contended that the enactment of the Act amounts to changing the basic features of the Constitution inasmuch as attempt has allegedly been made to constitute parallel Courts to the hierarchy of Courts established under the Constitution viz., District Courts, High Courts and Supreme Court. According to the petitioner such a law could not be enacted without amending Constitution in accordance with the procedure as laid down unde...
Tag this Judgment!Parmjit Singh Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)KarLJ54
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Heard.2. Constitutional validity of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the 'Act') has been upheld by this Court in the judgment pronounced today in Vishwabharathi House Building Co-operative Society Limited, Bangalore v Union of India and Others.3. Validity of Section 27 of the Act has specifically been assailed in this petition with prayer for quashing the same holding it arbitrary, unguided and thereby unconstitutional. It is submitted that Consumer Forums under the Act have been clothed with the blanket powers to pass orders including an order of civil imprisonment for the breach that may be committed by the party against whom the order is passed under the Act. As Section 27 does not prescribe any procedure for trial, the same is required to be declared unconstitutional being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. According to the Petitioner, the aforesaid section curtails the personal liberty of the citizen without prescribing any pr...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Nanjamma and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR1094; 1999(2)KarLJ109
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Heard.2. Section 6-A was inserted in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (Central Act XXX of 1956) vide Karnataka Act No. 23 of 1994, which received the assent of the President on 28th of July, 1994 and was published inthe Karnataka Gazette, dated 30th of July, 1994. The said section provides:'6-A. Equal rights to daughter in coparcenary property.- Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 6 of this Act: (a) in a Joint Hindu Family governed by Mitakshara Law, the daughter of a coparcener shall by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son and have the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son, inclusive of the right to claim by survivorship and shall be subject to the same liabilities and disabilities in respect thereto as the son; (b) at a partition in such a Joint Hindu Family the coparcenary property shall be so divided as to allot to a daughter the same share as is allottable to a son: Pr...
Tag this Judgment!Devkala Consultancy Services, Bangalore Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)KarLJ115
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner a partnership firm claiming to be engaged in assisting the banking public has filed this petition in public interest praying to declare that the action of the respondent-Banks in rounding up interest rates to the next higher 0.25% is illegal, arbitrary and untenable. It is further prayed that respondents be commanded to refund the excess interest collected from the borrowers as result of the rounding up to the next higher 0.25% for which respondent 2 be commanded to direct all the Scheduled Commercial Banks to refund the alleged excess interest collected from the borrowers.2. It is submitted that respondents 3 to 29, which are all banks, operating in the country were charging interest on loans and advances granted to the public at a rate which was in excess of what is permitted under the provisions of the Interest-tax Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the '...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Asia Private Limited, Bangalore and Others Vs. Union of India and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR1317; 1999(2)KarLJ259; (1999)ILLJ1239Kant
ORDER1. All these petitions have been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutionality of the proviso to Section 1(4) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on the ground that it offends the fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(d) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The constitutional objection adverted is common to all the writ petitions. All the petitioners have challenged the notification dated 1st of July, 1992 issued by the 2nd respondent-State of Karnataka vide Annexure-A making the provisions of the Act applicable to every establishment and every contractor, who employs less than 20 workmen on the ground that there is a transgression by the State of the limits laid down and it is the case whether the power exercised is excessive and unreasonable.2. To appreciate the grounds on which the contentions a...
Tag this Judgment!K.V. Amarnath Vs. the Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, New D ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ1558; 1999(4)KarLJ247
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J. 1. Without impleading him as party respondent but alleging corruption, favouritism and nepotism against Sri H.D. Devegowda, former Prime Minister of India, the petitioner herein has attempted to ignite the process of law by invoking action under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, apparently under the patent name of Public Interest Litigation. Prayer has been made for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to register a criminal case in the matter of offences allegedly committed by former Prime Minister and his family members which are stated to be punishable under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Penal Code. The jurisdiction of the Court has been invoked for the alleged failure of the respondents to take any action on the memorandum at Annexure-A submitted by the petitioner on 10-12-1996 when Shri H.D. Devegowda had become the Prime Minister. The omission on the part of the respondent to take action is al...
Tag this Judgment!Prajvi Industrial Supplies Vs. Capri Polymix (P.) Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: [2000]100CompCas266(Kar)
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. I have heard the learned advocates on both sides. A peculiar legal position has arisen in this case because the respondents' learned counsel filed a memo before the court setting out the details of the transactions and all the payments that have been made. The submission that was canvassed was that apart from the present proceedings, the petitioners have also instituted criminal proceedings and that when the present winding up proceedings were filed, credit for an amount of Rs. 70,466 was not given to the respondents even though this amount had already been paid by them and that a much larger amount was shown as outstanding. To this, the petitioners' learned advocate has stated that when he referred the matter to his clients they informed him that the respondents used to make delayed payments and that consequently, the petitioners had adjusted those amounts against earlier supplies. This explanation is totally untenable because a court expects total honesty from the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »