Karnataka Court December 1998 Judgments
Employees' State Insurance Corporation, Bangalore Vs. Dr. Panduranga P ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALT(Cri)663; 2000(3)KarLJ115
ORDER1. The petitioner herein reported to the Hubli Rural Police alleging that the respondents have misappropriated the amount collected from the employees of the 'Navanadu Dinapatrike' and on the basis of that report, the said police registered a case and after investigating the same filed the charge-sheet in C.C. No. 169 of 1988. In the meantime it appears, the petitioner also filed a private complaint before the Court in C.C. No. 144 of 1988. As these two cases arose from the complaints of the same complainant on identical allegations against the common accused persons, both the cases were clubbed at the request of the prosecution and tried by the learned Magistrate in C.C. No. 469 of 1989. In support of the case of the prosecution P.Ws. 1 and 2 were examined and Exs. P. 1 to P. 5 were marked. After assessing the evidence, the learned Magistrate acquitted both the accused persons. Being aggrieved by that judgment and order, the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (for short, 'the...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gowramma and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ1319
Hari Nath Tilhari, J. 1. Heard Mr. S.P. Shankar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.V. Tilgul, learned counsel for the respondents.The respondents had also applied for being permitted to withdraw the amount, but Mr. Tilgul wanted the appeal to be disposed of and raised the preliminary objections to the maintainability of the appeal itself under Section 30 of the Workmen 's Compensation Act read with Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, for short, 'the WC Act' and 'MV Act' respectively.2. Mr. Tilgul, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the present appeal has been filed by the insurance company alone and the grounds for challenge relate only to the quantum of the compensation awarded. He submitted that in view of Section 149(2), the defences open to the insurance companies are likely those which relate to the liability of the company or extent of the liability of the company under insurance policy which circumscribes the ground on which the insurance company ...
Tag this Judgment!Asif Alim Sait and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-16-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2391; 2000(4)KarLJ280
ORDER1. The petitioners, in this petition, claim to be the owners in possession of property bearing B.C. No. 178 comprised in Survey No. 157, Havelock Road, Camp: Belgaum.2. In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the notices dated 6th of January, 1989, 10th of February, 1989, 29th of May, 1989 and 21st of June, 1989, copies of which have been produced as Annexure-B, C, D and E respectively, issued by the Cantonment Board, Belgaum (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'). They have also prayed for a declaration that sub-section (1) of Section 185 of the Cantonments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as unconstitutional and void in law.3. A few facts that may be relevant for disposal of these petitions, may be briefly stated as hereunder:(a) It is the case of the petitioners that petitioners 1 and 2 sought for permission from the Board to change the roof and carry out other repairs to their building, which is the subject-matter of dispute in this petition, ...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore Vs. Venkataraju and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ984; ILR1999KAR729; 1999(2)KarLJ86; (1999)IILLJ272Kant
1. This appeal arises from the judgment under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, for short, 'the Act' from the judgment and award dated 29-7-1998 delivered by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner (Sub-Division 1), Bangalore in WCA/CR/5/97 awarding compensation, to the injured claimant, of the sum of Rs. 2,54,148.00 with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.2. The Tribunal accepted the claimant's case that he was getting monthly salary of Rs. 800/- and bhatta of Rs. 50/- per day, that is Rs. 1,500/- per month and thus in total he was getting wages to the tune of Rs. 2,300/-. It also found that the age of the claimant at the time of accident was 28 years. The Tribunal also found that the claimant was working as a workman under the owner of the vehicle, namely, respondent 2 before it, that is before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, who is respondent 1 in the memo of appeal. In other words Tribunal held that the present respondent 2 in the appeal was an employee o...
Tag this Judgment!B.V. Kuppu Swamy Vs. Syed Siraj Ahmed and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2438; 1999(3)KarLJ643
ORDER1. The respondent obtained a decree in Original Suit 10195 of 1996 on28-10-1996 against the defendants therein. Subsequently, he has taken out execution in No. 10062 of 1997 on the file of the X Additional CivilJudge, Mayo Hall, Bangalore, and it appears that the decree-holder/respondent had taken possession of the schedule property on 19-6-1997. The petitioner thereafter filed an application under Order 21, Rules 99, 100 and 101 read with Section 151 and Section 47 of the CPC as obstructer and claimed that he was in lawful possession of the premises on his own right and he was unauthorisedly dispossessed by the respondents. Therefore, he claimed for the restoration of possession. The portion of the premises which was said to be in his possession is described in the schedule. After filing of this application and hearing the oral submissions of the Counsel for the parties, the Executing Court passed the order holding that the application was not maintainable and the petitioner was ...
Tag this Judgment!State by Thyamagondlu Police, Bangalore District Vs. D. Mahadevaiah
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR1131; 1999(6)KarLJ471
H.N. Narayan, J.1. The State has challenged the legality and correctness of the order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, in S.C. No. 59 of 1993. The learned Trial Judge has acquitted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:The accused and the deceased were bosom friends. The father-in-law of the accused was a tenant of Rukmunamma-P.W. 6, mother-in-law of the deceased even prior to the marriage of P.W. 13-Manjula with the accused. The marriage of the accused with P.W. 13-Manjula took place about 8 years prior to the date of incident which occurred in the year1992. They had two sons. It is the case of the prosecution that deceased being the youngest son of P.W. 6 was employed in a weaving factory at Thyamagondlu in Nelamangala Taluk, had developed illicit relationship with P.W. 13-Manjula and it continued even after her marriage....
Tag this Judgment!Lebius Matrthews Vs. Corporation of the City of Bangalore and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-14-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR742; 1999(2)KarLJ333
ORDER1. Whether the reference made by the Commissioner to the Corporation against the decision of the Standing Committee, reversing or substantially modifying any action taken or proposed to be taken by the Commissioner or any order passed by him, becomes inoperative if the reference is not delivered to the Council of the Corporation alongwith the records within 60 days from the date of decision of the Standing Committee? is the question that falls for consideration in this petition.2. The petitioner is the owner of the premises bearing Nos. 58 to 61, Lavelle Road, Bangalore. He entered into a development agreement with East-Coast Rocklines Builders and Developers. He submitted an application with a plan for obtaining licence from the Corporation and for sanction of the plan. The original plan submitted by the petitioner was for 1.25 F.A.R. as the property is facing 5th Cross, Lavelle Road, Bangalore, whose width is alleged to be more than 9 meters. The plan submitted was not approved....
Tag this Judgment!Dr. V. Indiramma Vs. National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sci ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR946; 1999(1)KarLJ697
ORDER1. Though this case does not serve any purpose to the petitioner, it discloses the unhappy state of affairs prevailing in the 1st respondent-Institution in the matter of recruitment of teaching faculty in the said Institution. In the light of allegations traded by the petitioner, I requested Mr. Gururajan, learned Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent to make available to this Court the entire files. The learned Counsel made available to the Court all the relevant files and I have perused the same.2. The petitioner alleges that she has put in 30 years of service and that she is fully qualified and that ignoring her legitimate claim, the 2nd respondent has been appointed as Assistant Professor in Psychiatric Social Work. This contention is strongly refuted by respondents-1 and 2. We will examine the facts of the case and resolve the dispute.3. The 1st respondent issued Annexure-B advertisement inviting application to the post of Assistant Professor of Psychiatric Social Work in ...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka State Road Transportcorporation Vs. Kalwa Prakash and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ1537
Hari Nath Tilhari, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.2. This appeal is directed against the order passed on an application for restoration and for setting aside the order of dismissal for default. The application was moved under Order 17, Rule 2 read with Section 151, Civil Procedure Code. The Tribunal rejected that application opining that there was no good ground to restore. Feeling aggrieved from that order, the appellant K.S.R.T.C. has come up before this court by way of an appeal under Order 43, Rule 1.3. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that the appeal from the order rejecting the application for restoration is maintainable under Order 43, Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code. This argument has been advanced with regard to the office objection.4. I have applied my mind to the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant.It has to be taken note of that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal by itself is not a civil court. It is a Tribunal cons...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnabai Vs. Maheshwar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-10-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR1038; 1999(6)KarLJ357
1. Appellant-plaintiff had filed an application under Section 276 read with 283 of the Indian Succession Act for probating the Will of her deceased mother, late Mahalakshmi Chintamani. This application on being contested by the respondent, was registered and tried as a suit and dismissed; which judgment is being challenged in this appeal.2. Briefly stated the facts of this case are:One Chintamani and his wife Mahalakshmi adopted Maheshwar-respondent as their son and Krishnabai the appellant herein is their natural daughter who is unmarried and remaining as such till now. Chintamani died in the year 1956, and Mahalakshmi, the testatrix hereinafter referred to as such executed a Will on 23-2-1980 and had it registered under which she has bequeathed her one third share in the family property in favour of only the appellant while disinheriting the respondent. The testatrix died on 7-7-1992. Appellant sought for probating her Will. The respondent entered caveat and denied the Will of having...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »