Karnataka Court August 2000 Judgments
Riyaz Ahmed Vs. the Commissioner, Bangalore City Corporation and Anoth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-31-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Kant93; 2001(3)KarLJ182
ORDER1. This application is filed for review of the order of this Court dated 11-1-2000 in R.F.A. No. 677 of 1996. It arises out of a suit for injunction filed by the petitioner herein in O.S. No. 5596 of 1992 against the defendant including Bangalore City Corporation from interfering with the peaceful construction of the plaintiff in the schedule property.2. The Trial Court rendering a finding that the construction is beyond the limits of the plaintiff entering the area and precluding (protruding) on the road, dismissed the suit. As against the said decree of dismissal an appeal was preferred and the appeal came to be dismissed confirming the finding rendered by the Court below. However, liberty was given to approach the Corporation, to the plaintiff. Without availing such liberty the appellant has chosen to come forward to this Court by way of this revision petition.3. Mr. Veerabhadrappa, appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the plaintiff has not violated any rule or ...
Tag this Judgment!M.C. Charati Vs. Personnel Manager and Disciplinary Authority, Syndica ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-30-2000
Reported in: [2001(88)FLR305]; ILR2000KAR4021; 2001(1)KarLJ177
ORDER1. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges the validity and correctness of the impugned order bearing No. 240/PD-IRD/DA-7, dated 21st October, 1991, whereunder the third respondent-Executive Director and the Review Authority of the Bank, rejected the review petition filed by the petitioner against the punishment of compulsory retirement imposed by the disciplinary authority and confirmed by second respondent-Appellate Authority.2. The facts of the case leading to the writ petition, briefly stated, are as under:The petitioner was working as Manager at the Regional Inspectorate of the Bank at Belgaum. Letters were addressed to him by the Bank seeking his explanation is respect of the T.A. bill furnished by him and regarding the term deposit held by him and his wife jointly with Maruti Galli Branch of the Bank and the loan availed thereon. The petitioner Submitted his explanation to these letters. The petitioner was served with ...
Tag this Judgment!State by Arakere Police Vs. Mahalingu and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-30-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALT(Cri)7; 2001CriLJ237; ILR2000KAR4499; 2001(2)KarLJ427
ORDERH.N. Narayan, J.1. In these 2 petitions filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C., the C.O.D., Bangalore who are investigating Crime No. 84 of 2000 registered in Arakere Police Station in Mandya District have questioned the authority of the Principal Sessions Judge, Mandya assigning a bail application filed by the accused to the Additional Sessions Judge who is not the designated Court under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.2. The facts in brief are this.-The respondents herein filed an application for bail before the Principal Sessions Judge, Mandya who made over that application to the Additional Sessions Judge for disposal in accordance with law. The Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State appointed under Section 15 of the Act raised a preliminary objection questioning the jurisdiction of the Additional Sessions Judge to hear the bail application of the accused against whom offences punishable both under the Indian Penal Code and the SC/ST Act are alleged....
Tag this Judgment!Subhoda Shetty Vs. Bottoms Up Windes and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-29-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR4714; 2001(2)KarLJ321
Chandrashekaraiah, J.1. This appeal is by the plaintiff in Arbitration Case No. 3 of 1997 against the order dated 12-1-1998 passed by the Principal District Judge, Mysore. 2. The parties in this appeal are referred to as arrayed in the District Court. The plaintiff and defendants 3 and 4 are partners of the first respondent-firm. The partnership deed provides for arbitration in theevent of dispute among the partners in relation to the business carried on by the partnership firm. In view of this clause the plaintiff has made an application for appointment of receiver in respect of the business carried on in the schedule premises under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'Act'). Before making that application for an interim order the plaintiff had issued a notice dated 2-9-1997 to the respondents seeking for arbitration. The said application was resisted by the defendants on the ground of maintainability of the application filed by the plaintiff. The conten...
Tag this Judgment!Syndicate Bank Vs. G. Venkataramani
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-29-2000
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ483Kant
1. The Syndicate Bank is the appellant in this intra Court appeal. It is aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge, who though did not find any occasion to interfere with the findings of the disciplinary authority and quantum of punishment awarded, has quashed its order merely on the ground that non-payment of subsistence allowance to the respondent strictly in accordance with the Regulations amounts to denial of principle of natural justice resulting in nullification of the entire disciplinary proceedings. 2. At the relevant time, the respondent was working as Grade-II officer in the appellant-Bank. In 1992, it came to light that while respondent was working at the BWSSB Branch, Bangalore, he had committed serious acts of misconduct like falsification of records, misrepresentation of facts in the books of accounts of the Branch and acting in excess of his authority. Accordingly, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him with passing of an order of suspension dated A...
Tag this Judgment!T.S. Honnappa Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-29-2000
Reported in: 2001ACJ1935
Hari Nath Tilhari, J.1. Heard.2. The present revision petition is misconceived. No doubt, by an order dated 28.6.2000, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (the Principal Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore) has dismissed the M.V.C. No. 311 of 1990 for non-prosecution. The proper remedy available to the revision petitioner is under Order 9, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking restoration of the case after showing sufficient cause for his absence.3. The present revision petition is misconceived and is not maintainable. No doubt, if any delay is found in moving the application for restoration, the applicant can take and avail the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act while moving the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in the moving of or filing of an application under Order 9, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.4. Subject to the observations, the revision petition is hereby dismissed on the ground that proper remedy ...
Tag this Judgment!Pruthvi Educational Trust, Bangalore Vs. Bar Concil of India, New Delh ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-28-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Kant24; ILR2000KAR3753; 2001(2)KarLJ388
Ashok Bhan, Actg. C.J.1. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition No. 25129 of 1998 (Pruthvi Educational Trust, Bangalore v Bar Council of India, New Delhi and Others2), thereby upholding the order passed by the Bar Council of India (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent 1') declining to grant permission to the appellant to start a new law college which it had proposed to establish, the appellant has filed the present appeal. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the appeal are as under: Appellant is the registered Trust which has been founded with the object to provide, establish and to maintain Educational Institutions and also to undertake charitable, religious, social, cultural and benevolent activities. Respondent 1 had issued a Notification inviting applications from intending persons, seeking affiliation to start Law Colleges (3 Year Course) from the academic year 1996-97. Pursuant to the said notification appellant-Trust had submitted its ...
Tag this Judgment!North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. H.B. Nadiger
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-28-2000
Reported in: ILR2001KAR2650; (2001)ILLJ998Kant
1. This writ appeal has been preferred by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation challenging the order of the learned single Judge, who has affirmed the award of the Labour Court directing reinstatement of the respondent conductor, who was admittedly found to be guilty of misappropriation and pilfering Corporation's revenue collected by way of fare from the passengers.2. Now, it is a matter of record that on August 19, 1991, while the respondent was on duty as conductor in the Corporation bus bearing registration No. CAF 9868 coming from Sirsi to Mattigatta, on inspection by the checking squad, it was found that 20 passengers were travelling without ticket though he had collected Rs. 3/- from each of those passengers. Thereafter, the respondent was subjected to disciplinary enquiry in which the misconduct was duly proved and as a measure of punishment he was dismissed from service.3. Thereafter, the respondent conductor raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Court under...
Tag this Judgment!Shashi Alias Shashidharan and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-28-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4808
R. Gururajan, J.1. Three life convicts in Writ Petition No. 77/2000 and three other life convicts in Writ Petition No. 21/2000 are before this Court seeking for a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the immediate release of the petitioners and declare that the detention from 26-1-2000 onwards as illegal on the following factual matrix.2. Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 77/2000 Sri Shashi @ Shashidharan, Sri. K. Rajan, and Sri Anshad, have suffered a conviction order for the offences punishable under Section 302 r/w 34, IPC and Section 394 r/w 34 of IPC in Sessions Case No. 22/89 on the file of the Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore in terms of the judgment passed in the year 1992. They have undergone 10 years of actual sentence as on 26-1 -2000. Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 21/2000 Sri. Ganghadharaiah, Sri Rangappa, Sri Gundaiah, have suffered a conviction order for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the IPC in Sessions Case No. 106/88. They further...
Tag this Judgment!Shanthakumar and Another Vs. City Municipal Council, Chickmagalur
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-25-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR4253; 2001(2)KarLJ91
ORDER1. The first petitioner is the President and the second petitioner is the Vice-President of the respondent-City Municipal Council, Chickmagalur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Municipal Council').2. In those petitions, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the notice dated 15th of March, 2000, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-A to these petitions, issued by the respondent for convening a special meeting on 24th of March, 2000 of the members of the Municipal Council, to consider the motion of want of confidence moved against the petitioners. Since, during the pendency of the proceedings before this Court, the want of confidence motion moved against the petitioner is passed, the petitioners have also prayed for quashing the said resolution dated 24th of March, 2000 of the Municipal Council.3. Sri Narayanaswamy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, in support of the prayer of the petitioners that the impugned resolution passed expressing want of confidence ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »