Karnataka Court March 2000 Judgments

M.S. Narayana Rao Vs. S.K. Pundareeka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2000KAR1965; 2001(3)KarLJ339

1. The defendant in O.S. No. 10151 of 1991 has suffered the partial decree of eviction with a direction to deliver the suit property to the plaintiff. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the XIII Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, he has come in an appeal.2. The germane facts for consideration of appeal are set out hereun-der:The plaintiff who is the respondent in the appeal claimed to be an owner of the suit schedule property bearing No. 675, I Stage, Indirana-gar, Bangalore. It is further alleged that the suit property was leased in favour of the appellant herein on a monthly rental of Rs. 530/- and for seeking eviction, proceedings are instituted in HRC No. 10450 of 1981 on the file of V Additional Court of Small Causes, Bangalore. The said case of the plaintiff was dismissed holding that the relationship of landlord and tenant is not established. After the dismissal of the said petition the suit came to be filed seeking delivery of possession of the suit property and...

P. Sabitha Pai Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2000KAR2409; 2000(5)KarLJ343

ORDER1. The land measuring 9,800 sq. ft., which is a part of Survey No. 122 of Kothanur village, was purchased by the petitioner under a registered sale deed dated 8th November, 1990 from one Sri B.A. Nagaraj for valuable consideration. This has made the petitioner to come to this Court to challenge the final notification dated 19-10-1994 issued under Section 19 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). The facts in this case are as follows: The B.D.A. had issued a notification dated 23-3-1988 under Section 17(1) and (3) of the Act, published in the Official Gazette dated 2-6-1988, proposing to acquire several lands for the purpose of implementing the scheme called J.P. Nagar, 8th Stage. The land in Survey No. 122 of Kothanur village was not included in the said notification. But, the B.D.A., issued an addendum dated 7-11-1990 published in the Gazette dated 15-11-1990, stating that while issuing the preliminary notification referred to above, certai...

Muniga Alias and Abbaiah Another Vs. Muniraja and Others

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2000KAR3564; 2000(5)KarLJ527

1. This appeal by the plaintiff's is directed against the dismissal of their suit for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties which were agricultural lands but lost the character of agricultural lands in view of the Comprehensive Development Plan of Bangalore City.2. The case of the plaintiffs is that Item 1 of the suit schedule properties was purchased by Munigiddamma, the grandmother of defendants 1 to 4 and that the second item of the suit schedule properties belonged to the joint family consisting of themselves and defendants. It is their further case that one Krishnappa alias Munikrishnappa and Appaiah were the sons of Munigiddamma. The said Krishnappa had two sons viz., Annaiah and Abbaiah. Krishnappa's brother Appaiah had two sons viz., Muniga alias Abbaiah and Venkatesha, the plaintiffs. Annaiah had four sons viz., defendants 1 to 4 and 5th defendant is his wife and that his younger brother Abbaiah had one son viz., Krishna-defendant 6. The parents of ...

State of Karnataka Vs. the University of Mysore, Mysore and Others

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2000(6)KarLJ192

G.C. Bharuka, J.1. The State of Karnataka represented through its Education Department, being aggrieved by the order dated 29-10-1998 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 11755 of 1994 and other connected cases has preferred this intra-Court appeal. The above writ petitions were filed by the non-teaching employees of the respondent-University of Mysore working on different posts for seeking a direction that the University and the State Government should extend the Karnataka Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1977 to them as well.2. The learned Single Judge relying on the order dated 18th April, 1990 passed by the Division Bench in W.A. Nos. 2220 to 2239 of 1989 has issued a writ of mandamus to the respondent-University to extend the said revised pay-scale of 1977 to the contesting respondents as well and pay the difference of monetary benefits within 2 months from the date of receipt of the impugned order. It may be noticed here that 20 employees of the respondent-University...

Canara Bank Vs. U. Ramanath Bhat

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2001]105CompCas371(Kar)

Hari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising from the judgment and decree dated December 6, 1993, passed by the 6th Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, in O. S. No. 3688 of 1990, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,22,170.18 together with interest at the rate of 24 per cent. per annum compounded quarterly from the defendant as he availed of Can-card facility given by the bank on October 27, 1988, and did not pay money within the time granted by the terms and conditions.2. The defendant did not put in his appearance and he absented, The suit proceeded ex parte.3. After considering the evidence on record produced before the court, the trial court decreed the plaintiffs suit for a sum of Rs. 1,22,170.18. The trial court held that the court has got power to grant interest on a sum of Rs. 89,786.94 at the rate of 12 per cent. per annum from July 3, 1990, till the date of payment.4. The respondent has neither appeared, nor has filed any cross-objections.5. Sri M. D. Pravee...

B. Harikrishna Vs. Macro Links Private Limited, Bangalore and Another

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2001]106CompCas207(Kar); ILR2000KAR2855; 2000(2)KarLJ621

ORDER1. This petition is filed challenging the adequacy of the fine imposed by the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, in C.C. No. 14102 of 1991.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:In a private complaint filed by the petitioner under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code complaining commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, 'the NI Act') by the respondents on the ground that the petitioner had lent a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the respondents and to discharge the same in part, the respondents had issued two cheques dated 30-6-1990 and 7-7-1990 for Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 16,501/- respectively. When the said cheques were presented, the same were dishonoured by the Bank with an endorsement 'Refer to drawer'. Thereafter, as per the provisions of the NI Act, notice intimating dishonour of cheques and demanding the money was sent by the petitioner. In spite of complying with the mandatory requirements and waiting for ...

Bharat Electronics Limited Vs. B.E.L. Head Office Staff Association an ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2000(85)FLR364]; ILR2000KAR1002; 2001(3)KarLJ201; (2000)IILLJ1042Kant

ORDERH.L. Dattu, J.1. The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act. It is functioning under the control of Ministry of Defence, Government of India. The Company at present has nine production units, besides a number of Regional Offices spread across the country in different States. Seven of these units have Standing Orders certified under the provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. In respect of the other two units, final certification is pending on appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Company has its Head Office at No. 116/2, Trade Centre, Race Course Road, Bangalore City. The production unit is nearly about 10 kms., away from the Head Office. In the petition, it is stated that the main function of the Head Office is to lay down broad policies and corporate directions to the various units, which is purely of administrative nature. It is specifically stated that no production activity or manufacturing process as such ...

Honayya Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2000KAR3336; 2000(5)KarLJ57

1. This appeal is filed by the accused against the judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court convicting the accused for offences punishable under Sections 448, 376, 417 and 506 of the IPC. The accused was charged and tried for these offences. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused was running a tailoring shop at a distance of about 300 steps away from the house of the prosecutrix P. W. 3. She was getting her clothes stitched from the accused. They belonged to the same community. They were unmarried. She attained puberty at the age of 15 years. Her parents used to go to the work of rolling beedies. During their absence, the accused used to visit her. This was after one year after she attained the puberty. He developed friendship with her, started touching her and promised to marry her and thereafter took liberty to have sexual intercourse with her. It is alleged that the accused had forcible sexual intercourse with her whenever her family members were out of the house...

New India Assurance Company Limited, Bangalore Vs. Rubia Rasoolsab Des ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: I(2001)ACC39; 2001ACJ748; [2000(87)FLR332]; ILR2000KAR3380; 2000(5)KarLJ337; (2001)ILLJ90Kant

Acts/Rules/Orders:Workmen's Compensation act, 1923 - Sections 3 and 30JUDGEMENT 1. The Insurance Company has challenged the award dated 22-9-1993 passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Belgaum.2. The incident that took place on 21-5-1992 at 12.30 p.m. is not at all disputed. The deceased Rasoolsab was working as a loader in the tractor bearing No. KA 23-142 and 143. While the tractor was stopped, the loaded soil fell on the deceased Rasoolsab, as such he died. The learned Commissioner has awarded the compensation of Rs. 65,541/-.3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that there was no proper driving licence for the driver of the tractor. On the other hand the award is supported by the other side.4. In this case, the question of possessing the driving licence does not loom large for the simple reason that when this incident took place, the tractor was stationary. When the tractor was stationary, the question whether it was light motor vehicle or heavy goods vehicle in ...

New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Rubia Rasoolsab Desai and anr.

Court: Karnataka

B.K. Sangalad, J.1. The Insurance Company has challenged the award dated 22.9.1993 passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Belgaum.2. The incident that took place on 21.5.1992 at 12.30 p.m. is not at all disputed. The deceased Rasoolsab was working as a loader in the tractor bearing No. KA 23-142 and 143. While the tractor was stopped, the loaded soil fell on the deceased Rasoolsab, as such he died. The learned Commissioner has awarded the compensation of Rs. 65,541 /-.3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that there was no proper driving licence for the driver of the tractor. On the other hand the award is supported by the other side.4. In this case, the question of possessing the driving licence does not loom large for the simple reason that when this incident took place, the tractor was stationary. When the tractor was stationary, the question whether it was light motor vehicle or heavy goods vehicle in my opinion does not loom large. The point that has to be looke...