Karnataka Court February 1999 Judgments
S.R. Kiran Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Bangalore Branch
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD(Cri)865; 1999CriLJ3079; 2000(2)KarLJ163
ORDER1. P.W. 6-Raghotham, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI on being authorised by the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources and Culture Department authorising him to file the complaint, lodged the complaint against this petitioner under Section 26(2) of the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 (for short 'the Act') read with Section 200 of the Cr. P.C. for the offence punishable underSection 14(3) read with Section 25(2) of the Act, on the allegation that when the CBI Officer searched the house bearing No. 3000 situated in Prince Street, Yadavagiri, Mysore on 13-12-1985 and 14-12-1985 the petitioner was found in possession of bronze vigraha of Lord Chandrashekara, vigraha of Goddess Parvathi, idol of Warrior on horse, a wooden horoscope chart, paintings of Sri Ramapattabhisheka, paintings of Lord Balakrishna, 698 circular ganjeefa cards and 428 ganjeefa square cards which were declared as antiquities under the Act and the petitioner failed to get ...
Tag this Judgment!Management of M/S. Naga theatre, Bangalore Vs. R. Raja
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2481; 1999(5)KarLJ406
ORDER1. This petition under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code is filed for quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 22017 of 1996 pending before the Court of X Additional C.M.M., Mayo Hall, Bangalore.2. The brief facts are as follows:The respondent filed a complaint under Section 29 read with Section 34 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the T.D. Act') alleging that the complainant was in the service of the accused-petitioner herein and his services were terminated on 16-12-1978. The matter was referred to the Labour Court and by the award dated 30-4-1985 in Reference No. 82/80, it was held that the Management was not justified in terminating the services of the complainant and as such further direction was issued to reinstate him in service with full back-wages. This award was published in the Gazette on 15-3-1986. It is alleged in the complaint that even though the award is passed and has become final, the accused-petitioner herein have committed breach o...
Tag this Judgment!Patil Panduranga Venkanagouda Vs. Horatti Basavaraj Shivalingappa and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Kant78; 1999(5)KarLJ467
ORDER1. By this election petition under Sections 81 and 83 of the Representation of People Act, 1951, the petitioner has challenged the election and declaration of election of the first respondent to be illegal, null and void as well as has sought the setting aside of the election dated 25-6-1998. The petitioner in the election petition has claimed the following reliefs;Declare that the first respondent is holding officer of profit under the State as mentioned in the election petition. In other words the first respondent has been holding the office of profit under the State on the material date and hence his nomination paper was illegal and was improperly accepted by the second respondent-the Returning Officer, Karnataka West Teachers' Constituency and Divisional Commissioner, Belgaum Division, Belgaum and consequently the petitioner has sought for declaration that the election of the first respondent to the Legislative Council be declared as null and void and be set aside. The petitio...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Mitsugen Glazes Limited, Bangalore Vs. M/S. Varkey Overseas Tradi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas117(Kar); ILR1999KAR3354; 1999(3)KarLJ321
Ashok Bhan, J.,1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 23rd October, 1998 passed by the Company Judge in Co. P. No. 138 of 1992 connected with Co. P. No. 35 of 1993 directing the appellant-Company to be wound up.2. M/s. Mitsugen Glazes Limited, appellant-Company (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') is a Public Limited Company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 as Company limited by shares. The share capital of the Company is Rs. 1 crore divided into 10,00,000 equity shares of Rs. 10/- each. The Company was established with the object to carry on business of manufacturers, designers, assemblers, merchants, dealers, buyers, sellers, exporters and importers of all kinds of ceramic articles required for domestic and industrial use, like glazed tiles, washbasins, sanitary ware, switch-fuse units, electric insulators and porcelain ware.3. Appellant appointed Varkey Overseas Trading Company Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') as their dealer...
Tag this Judgment!G.N. Gurappa Reddy Vs. M/S. A.S. Finance and Investments, Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD(Cri)887; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)66; ILR1999KAR1655; 1999(3)KarLJ387
ORDER1. The respondent herein filed C.C. Nos. 14096, 14097, 14098 and 14099 of 1996 on the file of the 6th Additional C.M.M., Bangalore, against the petitioner herein alleging that the petitioner being the P.A. holder of his mother Venkatamma; that as she was due in a sum of Rs. 1,30,000/-; in that connection he had issued four cheques of the dates mentioned therein. Those cheques were presented by the respondent to the Bank but the same were dishonoured. Thereafter, he got issued notices both through R.P.A.D. and also under certificate of posting. It is alleged that though the notices were served on him, the petitioner had failed to paythe amount within the stipulated time. Therefore, four complaints were filed. The learned Magistrate after taking cognizance of the offences issued notice to the petitioner who appeared before the Court and filed an application under Sections 202 and 203 of the Cr. P.C. stating that no case is made out as against the petitioner, therefore, all the compl...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Prabha G. Naik Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2675; 1999(5)KarLJ698
ORDER1. The petitioner herein had challenged the endorsement dated 13-1-1999 in No. NCR;SR:837 of 1991-92 issued by the respondent 4-Tahsildar. In issuing the same, the said Revenue Authority informed the petitioner that the Deputy Commissioner in his order dated 2-4-1998 rejected the prayer for alienation of 30 cents of land out of the total extent of 44 guntas in Sy. No. 6/1p as there was an embargo under the grant order, not to alienate the granted land for a period of 15 years.2. I heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Dhananjeya. It is his argument that the impugned endorsement issued by the Tahsildar was without jurisdiction. It was also pointed out by him that the petitioner herein had filed an application dated 30-12-1998 before the Deputy Commissioner for seeking permission to alienate the said extent of land for the purpose of developing the rest of the land.3. This matter had been listed for preliminary hearing on 18-2-1999, At the instance of the Court, the learn...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Murthy N. Vs. Syndicate Bank and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR3696; (2001)IIILLJ363Kant
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J. 1. The petitioner is common in these two Writ Petitions. He has filed W.P. No. 14805/1989 seeking to quash the order at Annexure-D dated April 7, 1984 placing him under suspension and the order at Annexure- G withdrawing the letter dated July 26, 1984 by which the suspension order was withdrawn and treating him as under continuous suspension. In W.P. No. 2084/1992 the prayer is to quash the order at Annexure-Z1 by which the petitioner was dismissed from the services of the Bank and the order at Annexure-BB dated August 27, 1991 dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of dismissal. A common prayer is made in both the Writ Petitions to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in his original post with all consequential benefits.2. Since these two Writ Petitions pertain to the same petitioner relating to disciplinary proceeding, they are clubbed together and disposed of by this common order.3. The petitioner is an Officer in S...
Tag this Judgment!Basappa Yellappa Kappad Vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: (2000)ILLJ861Kant
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. The workman is aggrieved of the impugned award dated November 18, 1995 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in I.D. No. 298/1986 has filed this Writ petition urging various legal grounds.2. The 2nd Respondent Tribunal has adjudicated the Industrial Dispute referred to it pertaining the order of dismissal dated December 5, 1984 passed against the workman in exercise of its powers under Section 11 and 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (in short the 'Act') and passed the impugned award rejecting the reference made to it by the Karnataka State Government.3. The Tribunal on the basis of the points of dispute referred to it, and on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, it had framed the issues in addition to the points of dispute and adjudicated the dispute between the parties and passed an award. The issue regarding the validity of domestic enquiry was tried as a preliminary issue and answered the same at paragraph 10 of the award in the negative holding th...
Tag this Judgment!P.Y. Parry Vs. M/S. Cynotech Bioproducts Private Limited, Bangalore an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-24-1999
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas113(Kar); 1999(3)KarLJ68
ORDER1. The petitioners before me have presented this petition for winding up of the respondent-company and the effective dispute centres around a recovery of Rs. 10,00,000/-. According to the petitioner, pursuant to an agreement dated 15-5-1994 which has been produced, the respondent-company was required to discharge this liability of Rs. 10,00,000/- by way of monthly instalments starting from July, 1994, aggregating to Rs. 1,00,000/- per month. The record in the case shows that no payments have made pursuant to this agreement. The petitioner contends that despite the lapse of time and the service of a statutory notice, that the respondents have still not discharged the debt. The statutory notice was issued on 1-9-1995 and has been replied on 6-10-1995. In the reply, a contention has been raised that some amount of the live culture had become unusable and that certain products have been disposed off by the petitioner and the respondents therefore contend that the aggregate value of th...
Tag this Judgment!T. Sundara Vs. Management, Sericulture-cum-farmers Co-operative Societ ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-24-1999
Reported in: [2000(84)FLR37]; ILR1999KAR3779; 1999(6)KarLJ632
ORDER1. The petitioner herein challenges Annexure-B order and Annexure-C award. Annexure-B is the order passed on Issue No. 1 in Ref. No. 151 of 1987 whereas Annexure-C is the final award in Ref. No. 151 of 1987.2. The brief facts are as follows:The petitioner was working as the Secretary of respondent 1-Society on a monthly emolument of Rs. 500/-. He alleges that he was under thecontrol of the Managing Director of this Society who has been duly lent by Mysore District Co-operative Central Bank Limited, Mysore. The nature and the responsibilities of the petitioner was allegedly loan collections and preparation of loan papers. While so, Annexure-A charges were framed against the petitioner on 10-12-1986 and he was placed under suspension. It followed an enquiry. The petitioner alleges that he had requested for certain documents basing on which charge No. 2 has been framed. The Managing Director of the Society, who was the Inquiry Officer, declined to grant the same. Therefore, the petit...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »