Karnataka Court August 1998 Judgments
C.K. Pattamashetti Vs. the Bangalore University and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-21-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)KarLJ141
Acts/Rules/Orders:Karnataka State University Act, 1976 - Sections 2(7), 2(8), 29(2), 49 and 50Cases Referred:M.R. Sannarame Gowda v. University of Mysore, 1992(4) Kar. L.J. 593, ILR 1993 Kar. 454;University of Mysore and Another v. P. Maribasavaradhya, 1990(3) Kar. L.J. 468, ILR 1990 Kar. 3671JUDGEMENT R.P. Sethi, J.1. The appellant who was appointed as a Librarian by the respondent-University vide Annexure-B filed a petition praying for issuance of a direction to treat the post of Librarian as Teacher or Professor and extend the benefit of age of superannuation as prescribed for Teachers or Professors of the University. He prayed in the alternative that respondent 1 be directed to recognise him as Teacher having regard to Annexure-C to G and give him the benefit of age of superannuation of 60 years as a special case. It was further prayed that respondents be refrained from relieving the petitioner from service till he attained the age of 60 years.2. The writ petition was dismissed by ...
Tag this Judgment!Renukaiah Vs. Nagendrappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)KarLJ213
ORDER1. This revision petition arises from the order dated 18-7-1994 passed in Ex. Petition No. 210 of 1993 on the file of the Munsiff, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District.The order reads as under:'18-7-1994:Decree-holder by CSS/CAS Judgment-debtor by B.K.Steps Sri B.K. offered Rs. 800/-Sri CSS for CAS reports the receipt of Rs. 800/-EPS for Rs. 800/-. A.N. to judgment-debtor served on his wife. Held sufficient. Issue arrest warrant to judgment-debtor Call on 27-8. . .'2. Aggrieved from this order, whereby the Execution Court had ordered issuance of arrest warrant against the judgment-debtor, the judgment-debtor has come up in revision under Section 115 of the CPC.3. I have heard Sri K.G. Sadashivaiah, learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. The decree-holder has been though served, he has not put in appearance.4. It has been urged on behalf of the revision petitioner, the Court below is wrong in issuing arrest warrant, particularly in view of the fact that the learned Munsif...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ratnawwa Vs. the Karnatak University, Dharwad and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: [1999(82)FLR805]; 1999(1)KarLJ381
ORDER1. The petitioner and 2nd respondent are the wives of deceased Siddappa Rajappa Alwad, who was working as Group-D official in the first respondent. They were issued with an Endorsement as per Annexure-A to produce Succession Certificate from the Civil Court to settle the monetary benefits of the deceased employee. Accordingly, the petitioner,2nd respondent and their children filed P and S.C. No. 2 of 1990 in the Principal Civil Judge and C.J.M. Court, Dharwad. The petitioner got examined in that case as P.W. 2. She has stated that she has no objection to issue the Succession Certificate in the name of the 2nd respondent herein alone. Accordingly, by an order dated 23-6-1990 Succession Certificate was issued in favour of 2nd respondent alone to receive the service benefits of the deceased employee as per Annexure-B. On that basis the 2nd respondent claimed service benefits of her husband.2. The petitioner also claimed the service benefits of her husband. The same was rejected as pe...
Tag this Judgment!S.R. Lalmiya Vs. the Secretary, Karnataka Electricity Board, Bangalore ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR358; 2000(2)KarLJ146
ORDER1. A Junior Assistant, who was working in the Office of the Karnataka Electricity Board ('Board' for short), disturbed by the orders made by the employer in terminating his services, without holding an enquiry is before this Court, in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. Facts may be briefly noticed. They are as under:The petitioner was working as Junior Assistant in the respondent-Board. While working at Hubli, by an order dated 13-4-1992, he was transferred to Bharamasagar. On a request made, petitioner was re-transferred to Ranebennur, by an order made by the Officer of the Board dated 24-4-1992. The said order was questioned by the petitioner before the Civil Court on various grounds and the petitioner had also sought for an ad interim order of injunction restraining the respondent-authorities not to give effect to the order of transfer. Having failed before the Civil Court in obtaining the relief sought in the application, petitioner had approached this C...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company, Bangalore Vs. Smt. Neelawwa Kom Sidhap ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: I(2000)ACC30; 2000ACJ181; 1999(5)KarLJ377
Acts/Rules/Orders:Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Section 96(2)JUDGEMENT 1. This appeal by the insurer of the offending tractor-cum-trailer belonging to respondent 2 herein is directed against the judgment and award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (the Tribunal', in short) Belgaum made in M.V.C. No. 307 of 1986 holding the insurer also liable together with respondents 2 and 3 (owner and driver) to pay the compensation awarded to respondent 1-injured claimant under the impugned award.2. On the claim petition of Rule 1, (hereinafter referred to as the claimant') the enquiry was held by the Tribunal. On the basis of evidence brought on record by both sides the Tribunal rightly recorded its affirmative finding in claimant's favour on the relevant issue holding that she did suffer bodily injuries in the accident occurred as a result of rash and negligent driving of the tractor-cum-trailer bearing Registration No. MEZ 5345 and 5346 by its driver respondent 1.3. The defence of the appellan...
Tag this Judgment!Giroji Rao Alias Girmoji Rao Vs. Shivashankara Reddy and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ126
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner.2. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 9-8-1994 passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Kolar, in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 11 of 1994 from the judgment and order dated 4-2-1994 on I.A. I under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC in O.S. No. 60 of 1993, setting aside the Trial Court's order granting the temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff-revision petitioner and after setting aside the Trial Court's judgment, the lower Appellate Court rejected the application for temporary injunction. The Trial Court held the prime facie case to be in favour of the plaintiff as well as the balance of convenience to be in favour of the plaintiff-revision petitioner. But the lower Appellate Court on considering the matter held that there was no prima facie case for the plaintiff and he further found balance of convenience in favour of the defendant-appellant. The reason it has given is that the defendant 1 i....
Tag this Judgment!Muralidhara Vs. B.R. Seshadra and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ330
ORDER1. In this H.R.C. revision petition filed by the petitioner-tenant under Section 50(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act against the first respondent-landlord and the second respondent-rent collector, the petitioner-tenant has prayed that the order dated 25-7-1992 passed by the H.R.C. Judge in H.R.C. No. 1460 of 1988 stopping further proceedings and holding that the cause shown by the tenant was unsatisfactory and directing the tenant to hand over possession of the petition schedule premises to the landlord be set aside.2. Coming to the order challenged dated 25-7-1992, it is necessary to state some developments in this case. The impugned order was challenged by the tenant before this Court in C.R.P. No. 3818 of 1992. This Court by its order dated 23-9-1992 dismissed the revision petition filed by the tenant. The tenant filed Civil Appeal No. 5406 of 1993 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 2479 of 1993). The Hon'ble Supreme Court, by its order dated 11-10-1993, set aside the order passed...
Tag this Judgment!Muralidhara Vs. B.R. Seshadri and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR3363
ORDERM.B. Vishwanath, J.1.In this H.R.C. revision petition filed by the petitioner-tenant under Section 50(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act against the firstrespondent landlord and the second respondent rent collector, the petitioner tenant has prayed that the order dated 25.7.1992 passed by the H.R.C. judge in H.R.C.No. 1460/1988 stopping further proceedings and holding that the cause shown by the tenant was unsatisfactory and directing the tenant to handover possession of the petition schedule premises to the landlord be set aside.2. Coming to the order challenged dated 25.7.1992, it is necessary to state some developments in this case. The impugned order was challenged by the tenant before this Court in C.R.P.No. 3818/1992. This Court by its order dated 23.9.1992 dismissed the revision petition filed by the tenant. The tenant filed Civil Appeal No. 5406/1993 (arising out of SLP(C) No. 2479/1993). The Hon'ble Supreme Court, by its order dated 11.10.1993, set aside the order passe...
Tag this Judgment!S. Sridhar Vs. Tungabhadra GramIn Bank, Bellary
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-17-1998
Reported in: [1999(81)FLR421]; 1999(1)KarLJ344
ORDER1. The prayer in this writ petition is to quash the impugned order at Annexure-K dated 11-4-1991 by which penalty of stoppage of four increments with cumulative effect was imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner has also sought for release of all consequential benefits.2. The petitioner is an Officer in the respondent-Bank. The respondent-Bank initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner by issuing charge-sheet dated 22-2-1989 as per Annexure-A alleging certain misconduct against the petitioner. The first three charges related to the same transaction relating to disbursement of loan to certain beneficiaries and the petitioner's failure in not taking proper care in the utilisation of the loan for the purpose. The fourth charge related to sanction and disbursement of certain loan amount to a person directly without mentioning the existing liability of the beneficiary. For all the charges, commission of misconduct under Regulation 30(1) of Tungabhadra Gramin Bank (Staf...
Tag this Judgment!Thangavelu Gounder Vs. the Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga District, Shim ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-17-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)KarLJ77
ORDER1. Heard.2. Petitioner is the purchaser of 1 acre 37 guntas out of the land measuring 2 acres 17 guntas bearing Sy. No. 2/1, of Bhadrapura Village in Bhadravathi Taluk, Shimoga District which was granted under dharkhast to the husband of respondent 3 the late Thimmappa on 4-1-1964. He prays to quash the order at Annexure-A dated 12-1-1989 of respondent 2-Assistant Commissioner and the order dated 27-11-1997 of respondent 1-Deputy Commissioner produced as Annexure-B whereby he is directed to be evicted from the said purchased land for the purpose of its restoration to respondent 3 under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 ('the Act' for short).3. It is an undisputed fact that the said land measuring 2 acres 17 guntas was granted to respondent 3's late husband Thimmappa with a condition not to transfer it for a period of 15 years and that within this prohibited period 1 acre 37 guntas thereof was sold ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »