Karnataka Court March 1999 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M/S. Gowri Enterprises, Gowribidanur, Kolar District Vs. State of Karn ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Kant389; ILR1999KAR2022; 2000(1)KarLJ39
ORDER1. Petitioner, a partnership firm, was constituted with 18 partners with 2 minors admitted to the benefits of partnership, evidenced by Deed of Partnership dated 12-7-1990 (Annexure-A). The firm was duly registered with the Registrar of Firms, Kolar. The first two paras of the Partnership Deed recites thus:'Whereas the above partners formed themselves into partnership to carry on the business as real estate agents, developers etc., on oral terms and conditions on 21-02-1990 under the name and style of M/s. Gowri Enterprises having its principal place of business at B.H. Road, Gowribidanur, Kolar District.And whereas the above partners also participated in the Public auction of property belonging to M/s. Mysore Tobacco Company situated at No. 459, E-DVN, B.H. Road, Gowribidanur held on 27-2-1990 and the same was confirmed in favour of G.H. Nagaraja and Others in the auction by the letter No. MTC/MD/34/90-91, dated 23rd April, 1990 from M/s. Mysore Tobacco Company Limited, Bangalore...
M/S. Prakash Roadlines Limited, Bangalore and Another Vs. Smt. Prema
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ481; [1999(82)FLR751]; ILR1999KAR2808; 1999(4)KarLJ317; (1999)IILLJ1313Kant
ORDER1. These revision applications under Section 115 of the CPC have been filed challenging the order dated 26-10-1998 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sub-Division II, Bangalore.2. Workmen's Compensation Act confers a right to move for compensation and provides for proceeding thereunder and then provides for right of appeal under Section 30 on terms and conditions prescribed therein. Revision under Section 115 of the CPC lies from the judgment and order of subordinate Civil Courts means subordinate Civil Courts as created under the Civil Courts Act or at the most it can be said it may lie against the orders of the Tribunal which are specifically provided under the Act to be deemed to be Civil Court for the purpose of Section 115. Workmen's Compensation Officer, Labour Officer may be said to be quasi-judicial authority when dealing with the cases of compensation. But, they do not stand in the position of regular Civil Courts. No provision has b...
Maharudrappa Sirse Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ346
1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 27268 of 1998, dated 23-11-1998 directing the Administrator-respondent 3 to hold the elections to the Managing Committee of S.N. Education Society within 3 months from the date of the order and thereafter hand over the administration to the elected body.2. The appellant, who is a social worker, member and Ex. President of 3rd respondent-Society questioned the appointment of the Administrator-respondent 3 for a period of 6 months from 13-5-1998 before the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 27268 of 1998 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. He alleged that there are 51 life members in the said Society including himself. Though the affairs of the Society were running smoothly, at the instance of one of the members of the Society, who was not elected to the Managing Committee and due to political pressure, an order of appointing an Administrator was passed on 4-10...
Shivappa Basavantappa Devaravar (Deceased) by L.R. Vs. Babajan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ293
1. Permission is sought for filing the appeal saying that the original appellant died and he was not aware of the decree being passed against him. His sons having come to know about the non-filing of the second appeal they have come forward with the present appeal along with an application to condone the delay in filing.2. The suit was filed against one Shivappa Basavantappa Devaravar for injunction restraining the said Shivappa or anybody claiming under him or on his behalf from interfering or obstructing with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. Injunction was granted by the Trial Court and injunction came to be confirmed by the First Appellate Court. In this appeal the deceased man through his L.R. want to prosecute the suit.3. Applying the principles of 'action personalis moritur cum persona', injunction is a personal remedy against a person, in particular, the defendant. Therefore, the very prayer itself makes it clear that it is a restriction against that perso...
K.M. Shivarama Vs. K.C. Purushothama
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD(Cri)21; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)229; [2000(84)FLR387]; ILR1999KAR3988; 1999(4)KarLJ471; (1999)IILLJ1062Kant
ORDER1. The appellant filed 16 complaints against the respondent herein under Section 200 of the Cr. P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 14(1-A) of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') read with Paragraph 38 of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Scheme'), for non-payment of the contributions due to the fund for various months mentioned in the complaint. Those complaints were filed before the learned Additional Munsiff, JMFC, Madikeri, Kodagu District and the learned Magistrate after taking cognizance directed issue of process to the respondent herein in all the 16 cases assigning respective numbers. Thereafter, the complainant let in evidence and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Additional Munsiff and JMFC, Madikeri, dismissed all the complaints and the respondent was acquitted in all the cases. Being aggrieved by the judgments of a...
C.R. Poorna Pragna Vs. the Chairman, Land Tribunal, Koratagere Taluk, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-02-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2583; 1999(3)KarLJ591
ORDER1. I have heard petitioner's learned Advocate and learned Government Advocate on behalf of respondent 1 on merits. Respondent 2 has been served and has not appeared. 2. Petitioner's learned Counsel has raised a pure point of law before me wherein he points out that there have been two very grave and serious breaches on the part of the Tribunal on the basis of which he claims that the impugned order will have to be quashed. Firstly, what he demonstrates to me is that the petitioner is the absolute owner of Survey No. 143/1. The respondent 2 had admittedly made an application for grant of occupancy rights in respect of Survey No. 142/1. When the case had come up for hearing in the year 1988, the Tribunal took it upon itself to virtually permit the original application to stand amended and that it should be construed as though the claim is in respect of Survey No. 143/1. The submission is that the Tribunal has acted purely beyond its jurisdiction and illegally and the further submiss...
P. Ranganathan Vs. C. Anjaneya
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-02-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Kant31; ILR1999KAR1660; 1999(4)KarLJ243
ORDER1. This revision under Section 50(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 by the tenant is against the order of eviction under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act, dated 25-1-1996 of the 13th Additional Judge of Small Causes Court, Mayo Hall, Bangalore in HRC 10209 of 1995. The respondent is the landlord of the premises. 2. Heard Sri Javeed Ahmed Khan and Sri Poonacha, learned Counsel for the respective parties. Hereinafter, I would refer to the landlord as petitioner and the tenant as respondent for the purpose of convenience. 3. It is undisputed that the respondent is the tenant of the disputed premises and the agreed rent is Rs. 300/- per month. On 14-6-1995 petitioner instituted eviction proceedings under Section 21(1)(a) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act') on the ground that despite the notice demanding arrears of rent for the period from 1-7-1992 to 24-8-1994 amounting to Rs. 8,100/-, the respondent did not pay or deposit the said amount withi...
Smt. B. Suvarna Malini and Others Vs. Karnataka Administrative Tribuna ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-02-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2179; 1999(6)KarLJ6
ORDERAshok Bhan, J.Prolonged and repeated bane of Service Jurisprudence of the State of Karnataka has been the appointment of ad hoc/part-time lecturers in the Government Aided Colleges/Government Independent Junior Colleges and their consequent absorption in service for the purpose of conferment of permanent status. Supreme Court of India in its judgment in Karnataka State Private College Stop-Gap Lecturers' Association v State of Karnataka and Others, pointed out as to how an individual problem after becoming the family problem goes on to become a malignant disease afflicting the society in general giving rise to the contending equities between the two groups of 'haves' and 'have nots': It was observed:'2. Ad hoc appointments, a convenient way of entry usually from back-door, at times even in disregard of rules and regulations, are comparatively recent innovations to the service jurisprudence. They are individual problem to begin with, become a family problem with passage of time and...
L. Srinivas Vs. the Authorised Officer and Superintendent of Excise, B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD(Cri)20; ILR1999KAR2872; 1999(4)KarLJ320
ORDER1. On 1-12-1994 the S.I. of Police, Thyamagondlu Police Station registered a case in FIR No. 61 of 1994 under Sections 32 and 34 of Karnataka Excise Act read with Section 171-B of the IPC on the complaint of one Vekatappa alleging that on 1-12-1994 at about 2.30 A.M. one matador van bearing Regn. No. KA-20/180 was found transporting liquor bottles without any licence, thereby committing the said offence. Therefore, the police seized the van and produced it before the authorised officer and also registered a case against the driver and owner of the vehicle. The driver being the power of attorney holder of the owner of the van filed an application to release the van in his favour before the respondent. The respondent after examining 5 witnesses has come to the conclusion that the van was found in possession of 3 boxes of liquor without licence. Therefore, he ordered the confiscation of the van. That order was questioned in Criminal Miscellaneous Appeal No. 7 of 1996 on the file of t...
Board of Management of Sri Veerbhadreshwar Educational Society, Humnab ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR3009; 1999(5)KarLJ129
ORDER1. This revision is preferred by the Board of Management of a Registered Education Society named Shri Veerabhadreshwar Education Society, Humnabad of Bidar District (hereinafter referred to as the management') challenging the judgment dated 29-9-1997 of the learned II Additional District Judge-cum-the Educational Appellate Tribunal at Gulbarga ('the Tribunal' for short) pronounced in appeal in KPEA No. 13 of 1994 of respondent 1-B.S. Shirol (hereinafter referred to as 'the delinquent') allowing the same and setting aside the order dated 11-4-1989 of the management which was made dismissing the delinquent from the service as Principal of its S.B.C. Arts and S.V. Commerce College (in short 'the College').2. The petitioner-society is a registered Educational Society. It has been running certain educational institutes including the said college. The Private Educational Institutions run under the auspices of the Society were governed by the provisions of the Karnataka Private Education...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›