Karnataka Court March 2000 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.
State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Smt. Chandrabhaga Bai and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR2522; 2001(2)KarLJ136
1. This appeal is filed assailing the order of the learned Single Judge disposing of the writ petition filed by the first respondent herein in relation to sanction of Freedom Fighters Pension. 2. The first respondent sought for sanction of Freedom Fighters Pension on the ground that her husband Ganapath Rao Rajole was a freedom fighter and he participated in Hyderabad Liberation Movement and he was arrested along with one Yeshwanth Rao Saigaonkar in Case No. 253/1/1357 Fasli. She was informed by an endorsement dated 17-10-1998 that her application has been rejected as full documents have not been submitted. Challenging the same, the first respondent filed writ petition, The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the authorities to reconsider the matter taking into consideration the certificate and documents produced by the writ petitioner. Challenging the said order the State and its authorities have filed this writ appeal on flimsy grounds. 3. The learn...
The Managing Director, K.S.R.T.C., Bangalore Vs. Gopalappa Amarappa Sa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)KarLJ256; (2001)ILLJ943Kant
G.C. Bharuka, J.1. This intra-Court appeal has been preferred by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation ('the Corporation' for short) questioning the appropriateness of awarding 50% back wages to the respondent-conductor from 16-12-1985 till the date of the award (Annexure-D) i.e., 12-2-1993.2. The respondent was appointed as a conductor in the Corporation's Bijapur Division. On 13-3-1981 when he was on duty as conductor in Corporation's bus bearing No. MYF 4450 running from Athani to Bijapur it was checked at stage No. 11/10 by the checking squad. On verification, it was found that out of 34 adult passengers travelling inthe bus 15 were without tickets. On enquiry, the passengers revealed that the respondent-conductor despite collecting Rs. 2.20 from each of them as fare but he did not issue tickets to them. It was found that the respondent had already closed the stage entries against stage 10 in all respect except for denominations of paise 0.40 and Rs. 1.80 tickets. Accordin...
Kirloskar Brothers Limited and Another Vs. Bangalore Water Supply and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(5)KarLJ373
ORDERV.P. Mohan Kumar, J. 1. The moment the State desires to enter into contractual relationship in the matter of its activities it is beset with various hurdles one such being the opposition of prospective business contenders. The State, like any other, is entitled to arrange its activities in a legitimate and reasonable manner. Various judgments have been rendered by the Apex Court and High Courts laying down the principles to be followed by the State in the matter of bestowing any of its largess in favour of any person. In essence it discloses that it cannot show undue preference to any and it shall treat all competing parties equally giving them equal opportunity to compete and secure the contract. The Courts have ruled that the ultimate decision is that of the discretion of the State and the power of judicial review do not confer the discretion on the Court to sit as an Appellate Authority reviewing that decision. This limitation is of course, subject to the State satisfying the r...
United India Insurance Company Limited, Mysore Vs. Shivanna and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2001ACJ782; ILR2000KAR1608; 2000(5)KarLJ473
Ashok Bhan, J.1. United India Insurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the insurer') has come up in appeal against the judgment and award of the MACT II, Mysore (for short, 'the Tribunal') in MVC No. 780 of 1992, dated 8th of July, 1998 with the plea that the insurer was not liable to pay the amount awarded as the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid licence to drive the said vehicle as on the date of the accident. 2. Shivanna, injured (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimant') was going on his M-50 mini motor cycle bearing registration No. CNA 231 on 15th of June, 1992 at about 6-50 a.m. to attend to his duty at railway workshop, Mysore. A lorry bearing No. MYM 6633 driven by Early Prasad-respondent 1 came from the cross road without halting on the main road. It came from the wrong side and hit the claimant as a result of which he sustained several injuries including a head injury. He was taken to JSS hospital for treatment. Thereafter he was referred to...
Krishnappa Vs. P. Venkatanarayana and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: I(2002)ACC257; 2002ACJ257; ILR2001KAR1004; 2001(6)KarLJ541
The Court 1. By consent of the Counsel for both the sides, M.F.A. No. 3008 of 1995 is taken up for final disposal.2. The appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 19-2-1992 in MVC No. 1322 of 1988, has preferred this appeal.3. The appellant was the driver of the autorickshaw bearing No, CAW 1169 and he claimed the compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- for the injuries sustained by him. The compensation of Rs. 15,000/- was awarded. It is also held by the Tribunal that this appellant was responsible to the extent of 30% for the occurrence of this accident. Another case MVC No. 1323 of 1988 was filed claiming the compensation of Rs. 25,000/-. He was passenger in the autorickshaw. The Tribunal has held that three vehicles are involved in this accident.4. The appellant was driving the autorickshaw bearing registration No. CAW 1169 on Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore and the petitioner in MVC No. 1323 of 1988 was the passenger in the said autorickshaw. At that time, van in question came...
State of Karnataka and Others Vs. B. Krishna Bhat and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: ILR2001KAR2030; 2001(2)KarLJ1
Y. Bhaskar Rao, CJ.1. An extraordinary situation arose in the context of the following three circumstances:(a) Passing of series of orders by a learned Single Judge of this Court (M.F. Saldanha, J.) between September 1997 and July 1999 in public interest, after the issue of Notification dated 8-7-1997 providing that all writ petitions of the nature of Public Interest Litigation shall be listed before a Division Bench.(b) Passing of two orders of reference, suo motu, by the learned Judge questioning the correctness of the Notification dated 8-7-1997 under which the Chief Justice assigned writ petition (PIL) to Division Bench and requesting reconsideration of the decisions of the Division Bench in A.V. Amarnathan and Another v Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore and Another, upholding the said Notification and the decision of the Full Bench in Narasimhasetty (deceased) by L.Rs v Padmasetty and requesting that the matter be referred to another Full Bench; and(c) Filin...
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Bangalore Vs. Karnataka St ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)KarLJ501
Ashok Bhan, J.1. This order shall dispose of Writ Appeal Nos. 5188 to 5191 of 1998 arising from the decision of the Single Judge in W.P. Nos. 13159 to 13160 of 1998, 13172 and 13173 of 1998 and W.P. Nos. 6965 to 6968 of 1999 and 8586 of 1999 as the point involved in all these cases is the same. The fate of writ petitions would depend upon the order passed in W.A. Nos. 5188 to 5191 of 1998.2. Initially, we would be referring to the facts in the writ appeals which are as under:The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') filed the W.P. Nos. 13159 of 1998, 13160 of 1998, 13172 of 1998 and 13173 of 1998 challenging the order of the State Transport Authority (for short 'the Authority') granting stage carriage permit on the route Pantanahalli to Bangalore which overlapped the nationalised routes, the extent of which varied from case to case. The learned Single Judge non-suited the Corporation on the ground of alternative remedy. Relying upon the judgment of th...
State by C.P.i., Dandeli, Uttara Kannada District Vs. Ramu Thalapa Kam ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR3263; 2000(3)KarLJ510
M.F. Saldanha, J. 1. The State of Karnataka has assailed the correctness of the order passed by the Trial Court in S.C. No. 30 of 1994, dated 16-3-1995. Three accused persons were charged with having assaulted the deceased Ningappa on 25-1-1994 at 4.00 p.m. at Kajumala Gangoda of Joida Taluk and having caused him injuries as a result of which he died in the hospital after five days. The accused 1 is the father and accused 2 and 3 are the sons and it is also relevant to mention that the deceased is the step-brother of accused 1. We do not need to recount in detail the evidence because P.Ws. 1 and 2 are the eye-witnesses and they have in the course of the trial deposed to the effect that pursuant to some property dispute, a verbal altercation took place and that the accused 1 picked up a piece of firewood that was lying there and assaulted on the head of the deceased. They have also alleged that accused 2 and 3 assaulted the deceased with their hands and that they were inciting accused 1...
K. Jathappa Rai Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR1205; 2000(4)KarLJ503
ORDER1. The deceased K. Jathappa Rai, father of Pramod Kumar Rai filed Form 7 under Section 45 of the Act to declare him as a tenant and to grant occupancy rights before the Land Tribunal, Puttur, in No. LRY.T. 6173 of 1974-75. The Land Tribunal rejected the application by its order dated 16-3-1989. As against that order, the petitioner preferred an appeal in No. LRA. A-290 of 1989 before the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Puttur. The Appellate Authority also rejected the claim of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court against the concurrent findings under Section 121-A of the Land Reforms Act.2. Heard Sri S. Shekar Shetty, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri A. Keshava Bhat, learned Counsel for Caveator respondent 3 and Sri B. Krishnappa, High Court Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the Tribunal has committed an error in holding that question is a non-agricultural land. He con...
Ganapati Marthu Pai Vs. the Chairman, Consumers Co-operative Limited, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR2040; 2000(4)KarLJ333
ORDER1. Shop No. 74 situate at Kotitheerthaward in Gokarna Town Panchayat, Karwar, Uttara Kannada District, is in occupation of the respondent herein as a tenant (hereinafter referred to as 'tenant'), on a monthly rent of Rs. 23/- who has been using the same for the business of the 'Consumers Co-operative Limited'. This shop earlier belonging to the Hindu Joint Family of Ganapati Marthu Pai, petitioner herein (hereinafter called as the 'landlord' for brevity). The said Ganapati Marthu Pai in the capacity of the Manager of Hindu Joint Family, he being the eldest male member had filed an eviction petition on the file of the learned Munsiff, Kumta in HRC No. 6 of 1979 against the respondent-tenant, seeking the latter's eviction on two grounds.-(i) That he had not paid the monthly rents from 1-6-1978 in spite of notice of demand as required by Section 21(1)(a) of the Karnataka RentControl Act (for short, 'the Act') within two months from the date of receipt of the notice.(ii) That the prem...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »