Karnataka Court January 2000 Judgments
Rudrappa and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ78
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the conviction and sentences awarded to the five accused in S.C. No. 59/ 93 by the learned Sessions Judge, Chitradurga.2. It is the prosecution case that there have been long standing disputes in respect of certain property matters between the two groups who are parties to this incident. On 31-10-1992 at about 6-40 p.m. the five accused are alleged to have assaulted PW-3-Chandrasekharappa, accused Nos. 1 and 2 being armed with machus and the other three persons though not armed are supposed to have been instigating and encouraging the main assailants. PW-3 sustained four injuries and it was providential for him that his brother who is PW-1 and other persons rushed to his assistance whereupon the accused are alleged to have thrown the weapons at that place and fled from there. PW-3 was thereafter taken to the hospital and the certificate Ex. P.3 clearly indicates that he had disclosed the names of the persons who had assaulted him. He ...
Tag this Judgment!Employees' State Insurance Corporation, Bangalore Vs. P.S. Sreekantada ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-2000
Reported in: [2000(86)FLR89]; ILR2000KAR1498; 2000(2)KarLJ549; (2000)IILLJ102Kant
1. This appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the dismissal of the complaint filed under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. P.C., for short).2. The complaint filed by the appellant against the accused is an offence punishable under Sections 85(e) and 85-A of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (the 'Act' for short).3. It is the case of the appellant that the Employees State Insurance Corporation is a statutory body established' under Section 3(1) of the State Insurance Act of 1948. The complainant, namely, the Insurance Inspector, Regional Office, Employees' State Insurance Corporation, is a public servant in terms of Section 21 of the I.P.C. and Section 93 of the Act. He is authorised to act and appear and to make application and to initiate criminal proceedings on behalf of the E.S.I. Corporation and to represent it in Courts of law by resolution of the Corporation duly published in the Gazette of India, Part III dated ...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Mohammed Adil Pasha Khadri Vs. Karnataka Board of Wakfs, Bangalor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR2865; 2000(5)KarLJ290
ORDER1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition assailing the order at Annexure-M, dated 8-10-1998 passed by the first respondent-Wakf Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') under Section 65 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') appointing an Administrator to Dargah Hazrath Mardan-e-Ghaib at Shivanasamudram.2. The brief facts of the case are as under.--(a) One Syed Mohammed Peer Pasha Khadri was the Sajjada Nashin of the Hazrath Mardan-e-Ghaib Dargah at Shivanasamudram (hereinafter referred to as 'the Dargah'), which is a Wakf Institution. These facts are evident from the notification at Annexure-A published by the Board. Petitioner states that the office of Sajjada of the Dargah is a hereditary and as per the custom and usage, the eldest son would be entitled to be the Sajjada on the death or retirement of the Sajjada.(b) The petitioner states that the aforesaid Syed Mohammed Peer Pasha Khadri nominated his eldest son Syed Akhil Pasha Khadri, who is ...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka Electricity Board Vs. Basavva and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-2000
Reported in: II(2001)ACC306; 2002ACJ1043
T.N. Vallinayagam, J.The Karnataka Electricity Board who was the defendant No. 1 in O.S. No. 81 of 1993 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bailahongal in the suit for claim of compensation of Rs. 1,80,000 for the physical disability injury sustained by the plaintiff due to negligent act of the Electricity Board and which suit has been decreed, has preferred the above regular first appeal questioning the correctness of the decree so passed.2. The claim of the plaintiff was that on 28.8.1992 while she was returning after performing amavasya pooja to her bore-well situated in the land R.S. No. 137 of Pattihal K.B. Village at about 3 p.m., a live electric wire fell on her left shoulder resulting in the shock on her body and burning injuries to her shoulder. She fell down unconscious, she was taken to Government Hospital, Belgaum, where her right hand elbow was amputated, three fingers of the left hand also amputated. She was pregnant at tha...
Tag this Judgment!Ramakrishna Aithala and Another Vs. Smt. Bhagi Shettigarthy (Deceased) ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR1880; 2000(3)KarLJ134
ORDER1. The parties are referred to according to their array in the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Mangalore.2. The first respondent Bhagi Shettigarthy filed an application in Form 2-A under Section 38 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act (hereinafter called the 'Act') before the Land Tribunal, Mangalore, seeking ownership in respect of Door No. 19-2-C in Survey No. 233 of Idya Village, Mangalore Taluk on 30-12-1981, claiming that her father constructed a small house on the land granted by the landlord and also planted 6 coconut plants. The Land Tribunal sought verification of the claim by referring the matter to the surveyor and on 23-7-1985, a mahazar was prepared by the surveyor that 233 survey number given in the application as 228 was wrong and that the correct survey number was 65/4B. Thereafter the first appellant and first respondent were notified by the Land Tribunal. The Land Tribunal is purported to have conducted an enquiry between 6-9-1985 and 13-3-1986 and made the order ...
Tag this Judgment!A.G. Sathyanarayana Shetty Vs. M/S. State Bank of Mysore, Bangarpete B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Kant280; [2002]109CompCas559(Kar); ILR2000KAR1797; 2000(4)KarLJ256
ORDER1. Petitioner herein is the fourth respondent in O.A. No. 816 of 1997 on the file of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Bangalore. The said O.A. No. 816 of 1997 was filed by the State Bank of Mysore, the first respondent herein against M/s. Srinivasa Oil Extractions and five others (namely, K.N. Radhakrishna Shetty, K.N. Shankaranarayana Shetty, A.G. Sathyanarayana Shetty (petitioner herein), M.K. Sashidar and M.S. Krishnamurthy) for recovery of Rs. 1,69,77,679-43 with current and future interest, in terms of the final decree dated 28-8-1993 passed in O.S. No. 11 of 1991 on the file of the Civil Judge, Kolar and for consequential reliefs. The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the said application by order dated 31-8-1999 (Annexure-A) and directed issue of a Recovery Certificate in terms of the decree dated 28-8-1993 passed in O.S. No. 11 of 1991 on the file of the Civil Judge, Kolar, Feeling aggrieved, petitionerhas filed this petition for quashing Annexure-A, dated 31-8-1999 and seeking a ...
Tag this Judgment!B.V. Ramanujam and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Kant255; ILR2000KAR1657; 2000(4)KarLJ291
ORDER1. The petitioners in this writ petition have challenged the validity of the rules under which certain amendments were introduced to the 1952Rules.2. Sri B.M. Krishna Bhat, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the amended rules which are impugned in this writ petition are invalid and liable to be struck down on the ground that the said rules are inconsistent with the provisions of the Act insofar as it relates to the constitution of the Committee of Management. Section 41 of the Act provides that the Government may frame rules not inconsistent with the regulations. Section 7 of the Karnataka Religious and Charitable Institutions Act, 1927 reads as follows:'In addition to or in lieu of Dharmadarasis and Nazarins appointed under Section 6, the Government may subject to such rules as they may frame in this behalf appoint a committee of persons chosen by election or otherwise, for the management of one or more Muzrai Institutions'.Under the amended rules, Rule ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. K.S. Nagalambika Vs. Corporation Bank and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Kant201; [2001]106CompCas509(Kar)
T.N. Vallinayagam, J. 1. The plaintiff has preferred the above revision against the dismissal of his suit for recovery of money from the Bank. 2. The case of the plaintiff is that in October, 1991, the first plaintiff deposited a sum of Rs. 30,000 as fixed deposit in the Bank in her individual name. On the same day, the second plaintiff deposited a sum of Rs. 30,000 in his name and both the plaintiffs jointly deposited a sum of Rs. 20,000. All the three deposits matured on October 23, 1994. The second plaintiff ' had borrowed a sum of Rs. 20,000 on the security of his individual deposit and the maturity value of the same was Rs. 44,034. The amount due to the defendant-Bank in respect of the loan of Rs. 20,000 borrowed by him on the security of the deposit, including the interest was a sum of Rs. 35,334 and deducting this from the deposit amount, a sum of Rs. 8,700 had to be paid to him by the defendant. The same was not paid on the ground that he was a surety for a loan borrowed by his...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A. Janardhana Shetty
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-24-2000
Reported in: [2002]254ITR281(KAR); [2002]254ITR281(Karn)
V.K. Singhal, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law arising out of its order dated November 25, 1994, for the assessment year 1984-85. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the raid expenses is allowable under Section 37(1) ?' 2. The facts as stated by the Tribunal are that the assessee had done arrack business in the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1984-85. The assessee had incurred certain expenditure in helping the excise authorities in organising raids to reduce illicit trade, and claimed the expenditure towards raids in connection with the business for allowing deduction under Section 37. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee on the ground that it is the duty of the State Excise staff to unearth illicit brewing, for which they have got their own machinery. He furthermore stated that the assessee could not adduce any evidence as to how...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. T. Jayamma Vs. the Bangalore University and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-24-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR1528; 2000(3)KarLJ107
1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 6th November, 1990 passed in P. Mis. No. 495 of 1988 on the file of the Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore rejecting the permission to sue as an indigent person.2. The ranks of the parties shall be followed as in the lower Court. The petitioner filed the suit for recovery of damages of Rs. 9 lakhs. Since she was not in a position to pay the Court fee, she filed an application under Order 33, Rule 1 of the CPC. The son of the petitioner by name Udayaravi was a student who appeared in the first year examination conducted in September-October 1985 by respondent 1-University. His result was not announced due to the negligence of respondents 2 and 3. Therefore Udayaravi committed suicide on 12th March, 1986. The petitioner has now filed the suit to recover the damages on account of the fact that her son committed suicide. Inter alia she also filed an application to declare her as an indigent person and enable her to prosecute the suit.3. For petitio...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »