Karnataka Court June 2001 Judgments
R. Fiyaz Ahmed Vs. the Chief Conservator of Forests, Bangalore and ors ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Kant492; 2002(4)KarLJ145
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. One Fiyaz Ahmed is an allottee of shop No. 42 in the Beef Market, Shivajinagar, Bangalore. He is engaged in sale of beef in terms of the licence issued to him by the Corporation. He is carrying on the said business in the said shop for several years. He is also a registered Contractor with the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Bannerghatta National Park, Bangalore, for supply of feeding articles to the animals. He has supplied material without any complaint whatsoever. Respondent 2 called for tenders for supply of feeding articles for the year 2001-02 for the rescued animals Units 1 to 5 at Bannerghatta National Park, Petitioner and respondent 3 and others submitted the tenders to respondent 2. On 25-1-2001, the respondent 2 opened the tender and subsequently cancelled the same for technical reasons. A second tender notification was issued on 2-3-2001 calling for quotations at Units 1 to 5 again. Petitioner in this petition is concerned only insofar as it relates t...
Tag this Judgment!State by Kalasa Police Vs. Babu
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)KarLJ315
1. This is an extremely unfortunate case where the deceased father has succumbed to the injuries inflicted by his own son. Apparently, there was some dispute with regard to the 'hut' in which they were living and on the evening of 21-5-1991 at about 7.00 p.m., the accused got into a fight with the deceased father went into the hut brought a 'kathi' and inflicted two injuries on the old man, one on the head and one on the arm. From the evidence on record, it is clear that the injuries were not life threatening, the injured was taken to the Government Hospital and after a long lapse of 32 days he finally died. The charge was under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Trial Judge, after evaluating the evidence which essentially consists of the depositions of the son-in-law P.W. 1-Thowda and P.W. 2-Susheela, who is his daughter as also P.W. 6-Rama, who is the son by the first wife, came to theconclusion that there are too many infirmities in the evidence and accordingly acq...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka Vs. Venugopal Alias Gopi and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4354; I(2002)DMC9; ILR2001KAR4850; 2001(5)KarLJ495
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. We have heard the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor on merits.2. The charge against the two accused was that they had ill-treated the newly married wife Baghyalakshmi by demanding additional dowry and that she had been ruthlessly assaulted and in order to make it look like a suicide that the body had been hung. The evidence in this regard has been discussed by the learned Judge, who finds that the charges under the Dowry Prohibition Act are wholly unsustainable, insofar as, there is virtually no reliable evidence either of demand or of receipt as far as the main charges are concerned. Also, the crucial evidence with regard to cruelty or ill-treatment ie lacking. Also how and under what circumstances the deceased died is virtually left to conjecture. The Doctor has opined that the death was due to asphyxia and strangulation which supports the 'suicide theory'. We have reappreciated the evidence on record and we find that there is insufficient evidence to sus...
Tag this Judgment!M. Basavaraju and anr. Vs. Ashok Mallappa Hadimani
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ299; [2001(91)FLR333]; ILR2001KAR3823; 2001(6)KarLJ192
1. This appeal is against the judgment and award dated 23-8-1999 passed by the Labour Officer and Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Davanagere, in KA.A.DA/KA.NA.PA/CR/97/98, allowing the claim petition for compensation.2. The respondent is the applicant. He filed a petition before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation stating that he was working as a driver in the bus bearing No. KA-16:3270. On 17-1-1998, he was driving the said bus from Davanagere to Bangalore. At about 6.30 p.m., there was a collision between the bus and lorry which was coming from the opposite side. On account of this accident, there was a fracture in his right hand, injuries on both the legs and on the left side of the abdomen. In all there are 12 documents marked on behalf of the claimant. The claimant has given the evidence and one Dr. H.V. Dayanand, Orthopaedic Surgeon has also deposed. The Commissioner has come to the conclusion that the petitioner was suffering from 100% disability. As such, he has aw...
Tag this Judgment!G.S. Murthy Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Kant440; ILR2001KAR5256; 2002(5)KarLJ599
ORDERR. Gururajan, J. 1. Petitioner in this petition is seeking for a direction to State Government and Inspector General of Police, Davanagere, to provide security to the life of the petitioner and to hold an enquiry with regard to illegal and false complaint. Petitioner has also sought for a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to investigate the corruption allegations as per Annexure-A to G. The said prayer however is not pressed as I see from the order dated 22-1-2001.2. Petitioner claiming to run a driving school at Davanagere complains about working of RTO in Davanagere. He states in the petition that he has made certain complaints in the matter of corruption in the office of the RTO. According to him the complaint/representation submitted by him has resulted in officials of the RTO taking personal vendetta against the petitioner. Petitioner states that they lodged a false complaint against the petitioner. He further states that the officers prevented him from entering into RTO offic...
Tag this Judgment!Resina Balakrishnan Vs. State Bank of Travancore and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: [2002]109CompCas15(Kar)
R. Gururajan, J.1. This petition is directed against the order dated December 21, 2000, passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (for short the 'Tribunal') on IA-II in case O.A. No. 1303 of 1995, Annexure D and the order dated April 23,2001 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal in M.A. No. 9 of 2001, Annexure E.2. The petitioner is the daughter of the late Smt. Shyamala Bhanu, who was a party in the suit in O.S. No. 4871 of 1992. The said suit was filed against Epoxy Resins Pvt. Ltd. and also Smt. Shyamala Bhanu in her personal capacity as a guarantor. The Bank produced certain documents which bore the signature of Smt. Shyamala Bhanu as a guarantor. During the pendency of the proceedings, Smt. Shyamala Bhanu passed away. An application was filed by the Bank to bring the petitioner on the record as legal representative of Smt. Shyamala Bhanu. After coming on record, she filed an application seeking for an order to refer the original document stated to have been signed by Smt. Shya...
Tag this Judgment!Shashi Prakash Vs. B. Krishna Murthy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: ILR2004KAR2938
ORDERMohamed Anwar, J. 1. After hearing the arguments of the learned Counsel for petitioner in the morning session, this matter was passed over to be heard in the afternoon session, since the learned Counsel for respondent was not present. Even in the afternoon session, he has remained absent and, therefore, the Court could not have had the benefit of his argument.2. On the complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C of respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') is being prosecuted in C.C. No. 30041/1999 in the Court of XIII Addl. C.M.M., Bangalore, for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ('the N.I Act' for short). By this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the accused prays that the criminal proceedings against him in the said C.C. No. 30041/1999 may be quashed since it is legally unsustainable in law, in that, the allegations made by the complainant in his said complaint do not prima facie con...
Tag this Judgment!M. Basava Raju and anr. Vs. Ashok Mallappa Hadimani
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: 1(2002)ACC508
B.K. Sangalad, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment and award dated 23.8.1999 passed by the Labour Officer and Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Davanagere, In KA.A.DA/KA.NA/PA/CR/57/98, allowing the claim petition for compensation.2. The respondent is the applicant. He filed a petition before the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation stating that he was working as a driver in the bus bearing No. KA-16:3270. On 17.1.1998, he was driving the said bus from Davanagere to Bangalore. At about 6.30 p.m., there was a collusion between the bus and lorry which was coming from the opposite side. On account of this accident, there was a fracture in his right hand, injuries on both the legs and on the left side of the abdomen. In all, there are 12 documents marked on behalf of the claimant. The claimant has given the evidence and one Dr. H.V, Dayanand, Orthopaedic Surgeon has also deposed. The Commissioner has come to the conclusion that the petitioner was suffering from 100% disability, As s...
Tag this Judgment!B. Bhaskar Hegde Vs. Kallappa Lingappa Alias Ningappa Shiggaon (Deceas ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-13-2001
Reported in: ILR2002KAR987; 2002(2)KarLJ226
ORDERH. Rangavittalachar, J.1. This is a tenant's revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The respondent herein is the landlord. He had leased to the revision petitioner two non-residential stalls bearing CTS No. 4524 situated at Hubli for running Milk Parlour on a monthly rent of Rs. 175/- for each of the stalls. He filed an eviction petition on three grounds.--(1) That the tenant has unauthorisedly and illegally erected a permanent wall on the southern side and fixed a rolling shutter. On the northern side he had erected a permanent wall of about 3' height and fixed a rolling shutter and has put up additional permanent projection measuring 20' x 20' and has put up beedi shop. Hence, liable to be evicted under Section 21(1)(c) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act.(2) That the tenant has been using the premises for a different purpose than was leased viz., running a hotel though the premises was leased for running a Milk Bar.(3) That the tenant has been causing...
Tag this Judgment!T.S. Prameela Vs. Balakrishna and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)KarLJ102
The Court 1. The appeal is filed against the order passed on LA. No. I in Ex. Case No. 3299 of 1996 on the file of 2nd Additional Small Cause Judge, Bangalore. The appellant is the objector in the execution case filed an application under Order 21, Rule 98 and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code read with Rule 35 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act objecting the execution of the delivery warrant in respect of the petition property. 2. The background of the case leading to the present appeal are stated thus: The appellant is the daughter of one Ramaiah Setty. The said Ramaiah Setty had a wife by name Padmavathamma. According to the appellant the petition property was gifted to her orally by her father for Arisina Kunkuma. Ramaiah Setty had no male heirs and he died in the year 1972. By virtue of the said oral gift, the appellant claims to be in possession and enjoyment of the property. Further it was contended before the Trial Court in the application that one Subbaiah Setty was induc...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »