Karnataka Court January 1999 Judgments
Union of India Vs. Mrs. Nanda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-29-1999
Reported in: I(1999)ACC406; 1999ACJ1259; [1999(82)FLR844]; ILR1999KAR1193; 1999(3)KarLJ256
1. In an accident that took place on 18-4-1989 at 14-20 hours between Lalithpur and Dailwara Station the claimant's daughter aged about 7 years died and a claim petition was made before the Railway Claims Tribunal invoking Section 82-A of the Railway Act. After considering the respective contentions of the parties the Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,00,000/-to the claimant. Aggrieved by the said order the Union of India has filed this appeal.2. The main contention of Mr. Sanjay Gowda, learned Counsel for the appellant is that the application before the Tribunal is not maintainable as the applicant is not a dependant of the deceased daughter. He invited my attention to Section 82-C of the Act which states inter alia that an application for compensation under Section 82-A arising out of an accident of the nature specified therein by the person who has sustained the injury or where death has resulted from the accident can be maintainedbefore the Tribunal by any of the dependent of the deceased. Th...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Kothari Industrial Corporation Limited, Kandali, Hassan District ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-29-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ302
ORDER1. Since a common question of law arises for consideration in these petitions, the same shall stand disposed of by this common order. The question precisely is whether the petitioners who are parties to what are known as Pool Agency Agreements are entitled to be represented by an Advocate in the proceedings initiated by the Chief Coffee Marketing Officer, in terms of Para 11(a) of the said agreements. The controversy arises against the following backdrop:The respondent-Board has appointed each one of the petitioners aa Coffee Pool Agents in terms of agreements executed with them which are renewed every year. The agreements inter alia provide that the petitioners shall carry on curing work of coffee pooled by the coffee planters and deliver the same to the buyers under the directions of the Board. The terms settled under the agreements envisage payment of remunerations for the work undertaken by the petitioners. Para 11(a) of the Agreement inter alia provides that the Chief Coffee ...
Tag this Judgment!Srinivas Kalluri and Others Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Scie ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR1233; 1999(3)KarLJ73
ORDER1. Since common questions of facts and law are involved in all these petitions, they are clubbed, heard and disposed off by this common order.2. Facts may briefly be noticed. They are as under: Petitioners are students admitted to Four Years BDS Course during the academic year 1996-97 in different BDS Colleges in the State. These colleges are now affiliated to 'The Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences', which was established and incorporated by an Act known as 'The Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Act, 1994, hereinafter referred to as 'University', by the State Government for the purpose of ensuing proper and systematic instruction, teaching, training and research in Modern Medicine and Indian System of Medicine in the State of Karnataka. The Act has come into force from 1st of June, 1996 on its notification in the Official Gazette by the State Government. Among others, sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the Act provides that 'with effect and from the date of commence...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Orr Cee Electronics Limited, Mysore and Others Vs. Judicial Magis ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALT(Cri)608; 1999(3)KarLJ82; (2000)ILLJ843Kant
ORDER1. These writ petitions call in question the validity of prosecution proceedings instituted before the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Mysore in C.C. Nos. 2008 of 1992 to 2017 of 1992 and 2124 of 1992 to 2137 of 1992 and 552 of 1993 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 14(1-A) and 14-A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Mr. Murthy, Counsel appearing for the petitioners-company made a two fold submission in support of the petitions. Firstly, he contended that the institution and continuance of the prosecution proceedings, was barred by the provisions of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. He urged that the prosecution proceedings launched against the petitioners were proceedings in the nature of execution and distress of the properties of an industrial company, which had been declared to be a sick company within the meaning of the Act by an order passed by BIFR. Section 22 of the Act afo...
Tag this Judgment!M. Muddanna and Others Vs. the Commissioner, Bangalore City Corporatio ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR3980; 1999(3)KarLJ134
ORDER1. Heard the arguments of learned Counsel on both sides. 2. This series of revisions is directed against the respective judgments of the learned District Judge in Appeal Nos. 105 to 135 of 1994 of the respective petitioners herein dismissing their appeals filed by them challenging the respective orders of the Taxation Appeals Committee ('TAG' for short), all dated 8-10-1993 which were made in regard to revision of the respective building tax. 3. Certain undisputed facts giving rise to these batch of revisions are stated as follows: Each of the petitioners herein happens to be the owner of different portions of one and the same building premises which was originally bearing Municipal No. 25 named Ramakrishna Market, situated in Bangalore City. The revision of its tax assessment was taken up by the Commissioner of B.C.C. in normal course. The annual property tax with respect to different portions of the building in ownership of the respective petitioners was separately made by the C...
Tag this Judgment!Gayathrinagar House Building Co-operative Society Limited, Bangalore a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)KarLJ206
ORDER1. The first petitioner is a Housing Co-operative Society and petitioners 2 to 7 are its members. Petitioners are seeking a direction to the Bangalore Development Authority to deliver 66 sites formed in Sy. No. 5 of Saneguruvanahalli Village in terms of the agreement dated 27-11-1991. The further prayer of the petitioners is to quash the notification at Annexure-F, dated 12-12-1991 issued by the 3rd respondent-Special Deputy Commissioner proposing to declare an extent of 1 acre 6 guntas in the aforesaid land as 'slum area'.2. The brief facts of the case are that an extent of 10 acres 22 guntas of land in Sy. No. 5 of Saneguruvanahalli was purchased by the first petitioner-Society for allotting sites to its members. The 4th respondent approved the layout plan and it undertook civil works pursuant to an agreement in that regard. After completing majority of the work, the 4th respondent released 65 sites to the first petitioner and another 76 sites on 22-4-1989 and 6-4-1990 respectiv...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Karnataka Rubbers Limited, Kalaghatgi Taluk, Dharwar District Vs. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-1999
Reported in: [2000]101CompCas421(Kar); 1999(3)KarLJ65
ORDER1. This is a petition filed under Section 433(c) of the Companies Act wherein the petition presented by the Managing Director of the Company seeks an order of winding up. The contentions raised in the petition are that for a variety of reasons the Company ran into difficulties and reached a stage where it was neither able to do business satisfactorily nor was it able to repay large amounts which it owed to the various financial institutions. According to the petitioner as a result of this situation, in the year 1992 the K.S.I.I.D.C. exercising powers under Section 29 of the Karnataka State Financial Corporations Act locked the premises as a result of which the business came to a standstill. According to the petitioners for several years, the assets of the Company were not liquidated and since the liabilities kept increasing, in the year 1997 they filed a writ petition asking for appropriate directions from the Court inter alia for purposes of reviving the Company. In the meanwhile...
Tag this Judgment!Basava Devadiga and Others Vs. Anandaraya Patali and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2265; 1999(3)KarLJ30
ORDER1. This revision petition is filed by the younger brother of the original applicant before the Land Tribunal and further by his L. Rs to challenge the order dated 12-1-1989 passed by the District Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Udupi (formerly D.K. District, not Udupi District), in passing whereof the said Appellate Authority while setting aside the order dated 25-7-1977 in case No. LRY. 55-219. TRI. 1651-76-77 passed by the respondent 2-Additional Land Tribunal, Udupi, rejecting the Form No. 7 filed by the original applicant and further, allowed the appeal in part preferred by the original applicant one Chikkadevadiga, the father of the appellants 2 and 3.2. I heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner Smt. S.N. Sudha appearing along with Sri G.S. Visveswara and the learned Government Pleader Sri H.S. Surendra appearing for the respondent 2-Additional Land Tribunal and the respondent 3-State. The contesting respondent 1, the owner of the subject land having been served with n...
Tag this Judgment!T.P. Abdulla (Deceased) by L.Rs Vs. Mrs. Subhida and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR4140; 1999(5)KarLJ725
1. These two appeals arose out of two suits, case and counter; one for specific performance and another for vacation of the suit property. One T.P. Abdulla is the appellant in both the appeals who is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 64 of 1994 is the suit for specific performance filed by the tenant T.P. Abdulla. This suit was dismissed by the Trial Court and such dismissal came to be confirmed by the First Appellate Court in Regular Appeal No. 13 of 1995 and hence R.S.A. No. 754 of 1997 came to be filed. The other suit in O.S. No. 65 of 1994 which was filed at an earlier point of time and later renumbered is the suit for possession against the aforesaid T.P. Abdulla filed by one K.T.M. Abdul Sathar on the ground that T.P. Abdulla, the appellant herein was a tenant of the suit property and that suit was decreed by the Trial Court and such decree came to be confirmed by the First Appellate Court in R.A. No. 12 of 1995 and hence R.S.A. No. 753 of 1997 came to be filed. 2. The facts which are co...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Udayashankar Transport, Koppa and Others Vs. Regional Provident F ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-22-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)KarLJ46
ORDER1. M/s. Shankar Transport Company Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, Koppa-Kadur in Chickmagalur District, had been running transport business having a fleet of passenger buses. Labour dispute started, leading to strike and lock out. As the settlement eventually reached as Annexure-B would show, the management of Shankar Transport Company had decided to close down the establishment permanently, but, due to intervention of well wishers, a settlement was amicably reached before the Conciliation Officer, by which, five independent entities came into existence, four partnership concerns and the fifth one, an organisation of the employees of the Shankar Transport Company itself. The buses of Shankar Transport Company were sold to the said five concerns viz., 12 buses to one concern, 13 buses to another concern, 8 buses to the 3rd concern, 15 buses to the 4th concern and 13 buses to the employees concern, The terms of settlement provided that the empl...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »