Karnataka Court June 2001 Judgments
State of Karnataka Vs. S.P. Devaraju
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-12-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALT(Cri)27; 2001CriLJ3598; ILR2001KAR3983; 2001(4)KarLJ140
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The State of Karnataka has, through this appeal assailed the order of acquittal recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hassan, in Sessions Case No. 54 of 1988. By judgment and order dated 29th of November, 1995, the Trial Court before which the respondent-accused 1 was tried for an offence under Section 302 read with 109 of the IPC had been acquitted. The prosecution alleged that on the night of 1-2-1988 at about 10.00 p.m., the accused had inflicted two stab injuries on deceased Puttaraju, who was immediately rushed to the S.C. Hospital, Hassan, and was then transferred the same day to Victoria Hospital, Bangalore. Despite medical treatment, Puttaraju succumbed to the injuries on 5-2-1988. Shortly, after his admission in the Hospital at Hassan, the Police had recorded his statement which was in the form of dying declaration which statement was also treated as the F.I.R. in this case. The learned Trial Judge had recorded several inconsistencies in the ev...
Tag this Judgment!D.P. Sharma Vs. Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-12-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Kant401; 2001(4)KarLJ132
ORDERChidananda Ullal, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the orders dated 23-8-2000 in W.P. No. 10256 of 1990 passed by the learned Single Judge, in passing whereof, the learned Single Judge in entertaining a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach this Court yet again on the very same cause of action, passed an order granting permission to the appellant-writ petitioner to withdraw the petition and rejected the prayer for granting liberty as prayed for as above.2. The appellant-writ petitioner herein is represented by the learned Counsel Sri K.S. Desai, whereas the respondents 1 to 3 are represented by the learned Counsel Sri Ashok Harnahalli and respondents 4 and 5 are represented by Sri N.K. Gupta.3. The short point involved in the instant writ appeal is whether the learned Single Judge was justified in rejecting the prayer for granting liberty to file fresh petition on the very same cause of action, upon whichthe original writ ...
Tag this Judgment!Turnkey Constructions Private Limited, Bangalore Vs. Mrs. V.R. Bijur a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-12-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ARBLR31(Kar); ILR2001KAR4666; 2001(4)KarLJ320
ORDER1. This miscellaneous first appeal arises out of an order passed by the 6th Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore in Arbitration Case No. 39 of 2000, whereby an application purporting to be one under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of delay in the filing of a petition under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has been dismissed as not maintainable.2. The respondents in this appeal are owners of site Nos. 20, 21 and 22/2 situate in the Langford Garden in Bangalore, and measuring 92' x 250' in all. A two storeyed old building standing on the said sites, was in terms of an agreement executed between the appellant-Company and the respondents, to be pulled down by the former for construction of a multistoreyed building in its place. The agreement stipulated the terms and conditions subject to which the company was to put up the proposed new construction and part with a built-up area to the extent of 36% of the total comprising three resid...
Tag this Judgment!Rajiv Gandhi University and Health Sciences, Bangalore Vs. the Secab A ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-11-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Kant400; 2001(4)KarLJ491
Ashok Bhan, J.1. This appeal has been filed along with LA. II of 2001 to condone the delay of 77 days in filing the appeal. I.A. II and the appeal are taken up together for disposal.2. We would have certainly condoned the delay of 77 days in filing the appeal had there been any merit in the appeal. As we do not find any merit in the appeal for the reasons stated in the next paragraph, we decline to condone the delay. No purpose would be served in issuing notice to the respondents to come and defend the application for condonation of delay only.3. Writ petitioner-respondent 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent 1') is a college which was originally situated within the area of operation of Karnatak University, Dharwad. It was functioning under the Karnataka State Universities Act, 1976 (for short, the 'Act'). With intent to commence a Unani Teaching College, it submitted its application to the University for affiliation. The process of affiliation is governed by Section 53 of the Act...
Tag this Judgment!K.R. Haris Chandra Naik Vs. State by Town Police, Chitradurga
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-11-2001
Reported in: ILR2001KAR4727; 2001(4)KarLJ587
ORDER1. The present petitioner's son Sampath Kumar was one of the four accused who were tried for an offence punishable under Section 397 of the IPC before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, in S.C. No. 40 of 1996. The said Sampath Kumar died, and the case against him stood abated and it was only the other three accused vis., A-1, A-2 and A-4 that faced the trial and eventually came to be acquitted of the said offence by the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge dated 16-2-1999.2. It was the case of the prosecution that, in course of investigation, petitioner's son A3-Sampath Kumar volunteered information, led the police and panchas to the house jointly occupied by himself and his father, the petitioner, and produced cash of Rs. 5,000/-, which was part of the amount in respect of which the offence had been allegedly committed. In paragraph 12 of the judgment, the learned Sessions Judge discusses as to how P.W. 11-P. Thippeswamy and P.W. 12-K.P. Annappa, the ...
Tag this Judgment!British India Corporation Limited, Kanpur Vs. Star SpIn and Twist Mach ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-08-2001
Reported in: [2001]106CompCas467(Kar); ILR2001KAR3808
ORDER1. In this application filed under Section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the applicant has prayed for leave to proceed with the arbitration proceedings pending before the Arbitrator.2. Few facts which may be relevant for the disposal of this application, may be stated as hereunder:(a) The applicant, in this application, is a Company registered under the provisions of the Act and it claims that it is engaged in the manufacture and production of pure and blended woollen fabrics. According to the assertion made in the application, theapplicant-Company had placed orders with the respondent-Company on 12th June, 1986 and 2nd December, 1987 for supply of 32 numbers of TFO Twister Machines; and towards the value of the said 32 Twisted Machines, the applicant-Company had paid an advance of Rs. 11,60,808-00 on 31st July, 1986 and another sum of Rs. 24,89,448-00 on 3rd December, 1987. It is the further case of the applicant that out of the orders ...
Tag this Judgment!Tukaram Govind Naganvakar (Deceased) by L.Rs and Another Vs. State of ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-08-2001
Reported in: ILR2001KAR3550; 2001(4)KarLJ505
ORDER1. On the coming into force of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Act (Act No. 1 of 1974) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the deceased first petitioner late Tukaram Govind Naganvakar and the second petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners') filed Form No. 7 claiming occupancy right in respect of land measuring 4 acres 18 guntas in Survey No. 417/1 of Nipani Village, Chikodi Taluk, Belgaum District. It is their case that their father, one Govind Naganvakar was originally the agricultural tenant of the said land and he continued to be in possession of the said land as an agricultural tenant till his death in the year 1967; and he was paying rent to the landlord on half crop share basis. After his death, the petitioners, who were cultivating the land in question along with him, continued to be in possession and enjoyment of the said land as agricultural tenants till 1-3-1974 i.e., the date on which the Act came into force. According to the petitioners, one ...
Tag this Judgment!Mysore Chest Care and PaIn therapy Centre (Private) Limited, Mysore an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-08-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)KarLJ429
ORDERR. Gururajan, J. 1. Petitioner-the Mysore Chest Care and Pain Therapy Centre (Private) Limited, has presented this petition seeking for a direction directingKarnataka State Industrial Investment and Development Corporation (for short the 'Corporation') to forbear from proceeding with the sale of the assets of the petitioner in terms of the notification Annexure-M, dated 25-2-2000. 2. Facts of the case in brief are as under. 3. Petitioner 1 is a Company having its office at Mysore. Petitioner 2-Dr. Raj G. Pal is the Managing Director of the petitioner 1-Company. Petitioner 1 borrowed certain sums of money from the Corporation for purchase of medical laser equipment. Petitioner 2 has also borrowed certain sum in his individual capacity for purchase of certain other medical equipments. Equipments were purchased and put to use by the petitioners. Petitioner states that in spite of request to the Corporation, it did not grant any additional loan for purchase of additional equipments. F...
Tag this Judgment!Sandur Laminates Limited and anr. Vs. the Asst. Commissioner and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-08-2001
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1629
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. Petitioners are aggrieved by the imposition of water rate while revising the property tax. The principal contention of the petitioners is that when there is no supply of water by the Town Panchayat to their properties, levy of water rate is wholly illegal and unwarranted.2. Statement of objections is filed on behalf of the respondents justifying the levy and collection of water rate. It is stated that irrespective of supply of water, all the property owners have to pay water rate as the Town Panchayat had spent huge sums for laying pipelines to public taps, maintenance of public toilets, Sarvajanika Souchalayas and hence a part of the cost shall be borne by the tax payers.3. In order to resolve the controversy involved in these Writ Petitions, it is essential to look into the provision which empowers levy and collection of water rate. The relevant portion of Section 94 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 is extracted below:-'(94) TAXES WHICH MAY BE IMPO...
Tag this Judgment!Bheemasenacharya Srinivasacharya Gudi and ors. Vs. Gadag Veeranarayana ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-07-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Kant1; ILR2002KAR2377
ORDERMohamed Anwar, J. 1. All these three civil revisions are filed by the eight plaintiffs in O.S. No. 14/1997 pending on the file of the Court of the III Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Gadag, and the common respondents herein are the defendants in that suit. They are filed against the respective orders of the lower appellate Court by which the plaintiffs' I.A. No. 1 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC came to be dismissed and the trial Court's order allowing defendant No. 1's I.A. No. 9 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC stands affirmed. 2. The said O.S. No. 14/1997 of the petitioners-plaintiffs was instituted in the trial Court on 6-1-1997 against respondents (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendants') for the following main reliefs : '(20) It is Most Humbly Prayed and Submitted that : (a) Plaintiffs be declared as hereditary Pricharika and Parupatyagar of Veeranarayan and other temples in the vicinityalong with Defendant No. 2. (b) The notice of termination dated 13-10-1995 and th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »