Karnataka Court July 1998 Judgments
P. Narayanabhat Vs. Syndicate Bank, Shikaripura Branch, Shimoga Distri ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: 1999(3)KarLJ692
ORDER1. This revision arises from the judgment and order dated 26-2-1994 whereby the Court below has issued an arrest warrant against judgment-debtor No. 2 i.e., the guarantor.2. The facts of the case in nutshell are that, the judgment-debtor No. 1 had borrowed Rs. 10,000/- for agricultural purposes from the respondent-Bank. A decree was passed in favour of the Bank on 9-8-1991 for a sum of Rs. 29,834-80 paise. It may be mentioned here that the judgment-debtor No. 2 is the guarantor. There is no doubt the decree-holder may execute the decree against either of the parties. He can execute the decree against the guarantor. The decree-holder filed the application for execution on 19-11-1991. The decree had been passed in Original Suit No. 348 of 1989. On 26-2-1994 the order-sheet indicates the Court's order which reads as under:--'26-2-1994DHR by Sri N.C.JD 1 and 2 by Sri K.S.V.JD 4 and 6 - AbsentJD 3,5,7 to 10 by Sri M.L.S.A/N to JD1, unserved as not in station.J.D-2's son present.Balance...
Tag this Judgment!Gurusidda Basawani Patil and Another Vs. the Joint Registrar of Co-ope ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR3765; 1998(4)KarLJ436
ORDER1. Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for R-1. Issue rule.The writ petitions are taken up with the consent of parties.2. 'The petitioners are the President and Vice-President of the third respondent-society. The petitioners were elected at a meeting on 3-4-1998. The minutes of the meeting was confirmed by the Managing Committee on 19-5-1998. On 9-6-1998 the second respondent filed an election petition. There was also a prayer for an interim order restraining the petitioners from functioning as President and Vice-President. By an order dated 9-6-1998 at Annexure-D the first respondent restrained the petitioners from functioning as President and Vice-President.3. The first respondent passed the following interim order:'The resolution dated 3-4-1998 of the defendant 1-Bank in which the defendant 2 and defendant 3 were elected as the President and Vice-President of defendant 1-Bank respectively is stayed. Further it is ordered that the defendant 2 and defendant 3 are r...
Tag this Judgment!K. Balakrishna Rao Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR4113; 1998(5)KarLJ419
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J. 1. Constitutional validity of Sections 68-B, 68-C and 68-D of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (hereinafter called the 'Act') as inserted by Karnataka Act No. 2 of 1995 and Section 3 of the Amending Act has been challenged in these petitions on various grounds. However, keeping in view the fact that Karnataka Act No. 2 of 1995 had received the assent of the President of India on 21-2-1995, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners have restricted their arguments and challenged the vires of the offending sections mainly on the ground of being violative of the guarantee of equality conferred by Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted alternatively that non-providing of the alternative forum for redressal of grievances of the persons dealing with the liquor trade and bound by the Act have resulted in miscarriage of justice and that the officers of the Excise Department have been made Judges of their own cause. It is further alleged that the off...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Hanamavva Vs. Manappa Mukkanda Iti (Deceasec) by L.Rs
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)KarLJ542
ORDER1. This is a revision petition filed under Section 115 of the CPC from the judgment and order dated 13-3-1995 delivered by the Principal Civil Judge, Bagalkot, in Final Decree Proceedings Case No. 2 of 1991 directing the respondents to pay a sum of Rs. 200/- per month to the petitioner for her maintenance from 1-1-1994 till possession of the schedule properties are given to her in view of the order towards her subsistence allowance made on I.A. 4.2. The facts of the case in nutshell are that, the petitioner had filed a partition suit which had been decreed in her favour. But she had not been given her share's possession. It consists of almost 95 acres of agricultural land. Under preliminary decree the applicant had been held to be entitled to half share in the total land. As the proceedings were delayed and she was not having enough income or money for maintaining herself, the applicant moved an application for subsistence allowance or for her maintenance and sought a direction fr...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore Vs. Smt. Muthamma an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ289; 1999(6)KarLJ507
1. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and award passed in MVC Nos. 597 of 1987 and 598 of 1987 respectively with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and costs.2. The petitioners in MVC Nos. 597 and 598 of 1987 along with other two petitioners in MVC Nos. 596 and 586 of 1987 filed petition for compensation stating that both these petitioners were working at Gurudevashram, Devaragudda, Kalmanje village in Belthangady Taluk. They were travelling in the jeep bearing No. MEG 3586 belonging to respondent 3 Ashram and insured with R-4, on 29-3-1987 at about 10-30 a.m. from Ujira side towards Mangalore side. The KSRTC Bus bearing No. MYF 9032 belonging to the II respondent came from the opposite side and dashed against the jeep. Initially the petitioners had made only the driver of the KSRTC as respondent alleging negligence. Subsequently the owner and the insurer of the jeep were made parties. The petitioners in MVC Nos. 596 and 586 of 1987 took up the matter before Lok Adalat...
Tag this Judgment!Dhaesa and ors. Vs. Bandagisab and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Kant190
T.N. Vallinayagam, J.1. The first Plaintiff is the appellant. The suit for declaration that the Plaintiff is the owner and possessor of the suit property and a decree for possession by evicting the defendants was decreed by the trial Court. But on appeal came to be dismissed by the first appellate Court. Hence the Plaintiff is before this Court in this regular second appeal.2. The suit property is a land measuring 9 acres 38 guntas and a residential house bearing No. 3/70 originally belong to the mother of the Plaintiff namely Khasimbi. It was claimed that the properties were given to them other in lieu of the Mehar. The Plaintiffs mother died 31 years prior to the filing of the suit and the plaintiff is the only survived heir. He was minor at the time of the death of the mother and his father was managing the property till his father was dispossessed illegally by the defendants. Defendants-1 and 2 were not related to each other. Defendant-2 has been married to one Badesab and later sh...
Tag this Judgment!P. Narayanabhat Vs. the Syndicate Bank and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR4167
ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This revision arises from the judgment and order dated 26.2.1994 whereby the Court below has issued an arrest warrant against judgment-debtor No. 2 i.e., the guarantor.2. The facts of the case in nut-shell are that, the judgment-debtor No. 1 had borrowed Rs. 10,000/- for agricultural purposes from the respondent-Bank. A decree was passed in favour of the Bank on 9.8.1991 for a sum of Rs. 29,834-80 paise. It may be mentioned here that the judgment-debtor No. 2 is the guarantee. There is no doubt the decree-holder may execute the decree against either of the parties. He can execute the decree against the gurantee. The decree-holder filed the application for execution on 19.11.1991. The decree had been passed in Original Suit No. 348/89. On 26.2.1994 the order-sheet indicates the Courts order which reads as under: -'26.2.1994 DHR by Sri N.C. JD 1 and 2 by Sri K.S.V. JD 4 & 6 - Absent. JD 3, 5, 7 and 10 by Sri M.L.S. A/N to JD1, unserved as not in station. J.D...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. United India Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore Vs. Mohammed an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-15-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ158; 1999(1)KarLJ265
Acts/Rules/Orders:Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - Sections 4 and 17;Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 23, Rule 3Case Referred:United Indian Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Patramma and Another, 1995(3) Kar. L.J. 653, ILR 1995 Kar. 2086JUDGEMENT 1. This appeal by the Insurance Company is filed against the award in WCA CR 24/NF/94, dated 20-2-1995 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation.2. The first respondent has filed an application claiming the compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- as he met with an accident on 29-9-1993. He was working as Driver under the employment of second respondent.3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the case was referred to the Lok Adalat and the parties had agreed for the compensation of Rs. 80,664 and compromise application was filed under Order 23, Rule 3 of the CPC before the Commissioner. But the Commissioner has not passed the award in terms of the compromise arrived at before Lok Adalat and he has awarded Rs. 1,00,830/-. ...
Tag this Judgment!A.K. Thippanna Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga District, Shimoga and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-15-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)KarLJ136
ORDER1. Heard.2. It is not in dispute that the land in question measuring 2 acres bearing Sy. No. 29 of Belliganudu village, channagiri taluk, Shimoga District was the Government land that was granted to the petitioner's father Rangappa by the Government under dharkast and the saguvelli chit dated 30-3-1962 was issued to the grantee in respect thereof. The grant was made to him imposing the condition that the land shall not be transferred to any person for a period of 15 years. But the same was sold by him to one Giriyappa on 16-6-1966 under a registered sale deed. Thereafter, the said purchaser was stated to have borrowed the loan from certain Agricultural Co-operative Society mortgaging the said land. On his default in repayment of the loan, the said land was brought to sale by public auction by the said society and the same was purchased by respondent 3 herein, in that auction under the registered sale deed dated 10-12-1977.3. The grantee Rangappa belonged to Scheduled Caste. After ...
Tag this Judgment!Venkatagiriyappa Vs. Karnataka Electricity Board, Bangalore and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-15-1998
Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ482
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. In view of the conflicting judgments and variance of directions issued by various Benches of this Court while interpreting constitutionality, legality and scope of Karnataka Electricity Board's (for short, 'Board') order dated 25th February, 1995 and the Circular No. CI-255-MGS 96, dated 4-10-1996 of the State Government, the learned Single Judge has referred all these petitions to the Division Bench for an authoritative pronouncement. In his order of reference, the learned Judge has formulated the following questions of public importance requiring determination for grant or refusal of the relief to the writ petitioners:(i) Does a citizen have any fundamental or other right to draw subsoil water for irrigation, business or drinking purpose and in particular is any such right a part of the right to life or livelihood guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution; (ii) In the absence of any statutory provision on the subject can an Executive Order regulate the e...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »