Karnataka Court January 2002 Judgments

Millipore India Private Ltd. Vs. Government of India and ors.

Court: Karnataka

R. Gururajan, J.1. I.A.-I is allowed. Amendment is permitted.2. The petitioner in this case is calling in question the order at Annexure 'L' dated 15-10-2001 issued by the 2nd respondent. The facts leading to this petition are as under :The petitioner a Registered Company is carrying on its activities in the manufacture of high quality Water Purification System. It has Head Office at Bangalore. M/s. Millipore SAS BP 307 78054, Saint Quentin Yveliens Cedex, France, are having factories at France and United States of America and they are Joint Venture Partners in the petitioner-Company. The petitioner has filed Annexure 'A' series Certificates issued by the Pollution Control Boards. The petitioner has also installed Water Purification Systems in institutions such as Indian Institute of Science, National Institute of Oceanography, Semi Biotech Research Laboratory, National Institute of Ocean Techonology, School of Bio-Technology etc. The petitioner has filed Certificates Annexure 'B' seri...

Smt. K.S. Chayadevi and ors. Vs. Corporation of the City of Bangalore ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: II(2002)ACC439; 2003ACJ999; ILR2002KAR901; 2002(2)KarLJ515

1. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether a claim petition was maintainable under the Motor Vehicles Act in a case, where the accident had occurred due entirely to the negligence of an outside agency without the agency itself making use of any motor vehicle.2. The deceased, Sri KV. Srinivasa Murthy was on the fateful night driving home on a scooter owned by him. When he reached 30th Cross, Kanakapura Road in Jayanagar, the scooter hit a pothole on the road and overturned. The driver Sri Murthy sustained injuries to which he succumbed. The dependents of the deceased lodged a claim for payment of compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bangalore against the respondent-Corporation and the New India Insurance Company Limited with whom the scooter was insured. The claim proceeded on the ground that the accident was caused entirely because of the failure of the Corporation to maintain the road and thereby ensure the safety of those, who u...

Suryakantha Rao Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2002(3)KarLJ498

ORDERChandrashekaraiah, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition has challenged the order dated 23-1-2002 passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings No, MSC. CR. 47/2001-02 aide Annexure-G jetting aside the order of the Tahsildar under which, the Tahsildar rejected the complaint filed by the respondent 4 by refusing to recall the caste certificate issued earlier to the petitioner,2. The order passed by the Tahsildar has been questioned by the respondent 4 by way of an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner under Section 4-B of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes Observation of Appointments, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 1997.3. In the instant case, the petitioner contested for election to the post of 'Councilor' to the Bangalore Mahanagara Palika from Ward No. 92 and got elected also. This election, i am told is the subject-matter of the Election Petition No. 25 of 2001. In the meanwhile, the 4th respondent had approached the Tahsildar to recall the...

Smt. Premabai Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2002KAR2515; 2002(5)KarLJ17

ORDER1. In this appeal the appellant calls in question the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by her challenging the orders passed by respondents 2 and 3 resuming the lands in favour of the grantee.2. Few facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal, briefly stated, are as under:Two pieces of land, one measuring 1 acre 33 guntas and another measuring 2 acres 22 guntas of Mangalaboesu Village, Sagar Taluk, were granted in favour of one Eeli Puttappa. The first grant of 1 acre and 33 guntas of land was in the year 1950-51 and the second of 2 acres and 22 guntas was in the year 1955-56. The actual dates of grant are not forthcoming from the records. Under the Darakhast rules prevailing at the time of first grant there was a total ban of alienation under Rule 43(8) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. In the year 1953 of the Rules were amended and under the amended Rule 43(8) the total ban on alienation was removed and in its place the non-aliena...

B. Nagaraj Setty Sons Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes a ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2002]127STC407(Kar)

ORDERP. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. Sri Veda Murthy, learned Government Pleader, is directed to take notice for respondents.2. Though this petition is posted for preliminary hearing, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this order.3. In this petition, the petitioner has made two prayers. Firstly, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents not to take coercive steps against the petitioner to recover the amount due by the petitioner subject to the order of assessment passed against it till the disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner before the appellate authority ; secondly, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the Karnataka State Appellate Tribunal to dispose of the appeal- early.4. So far as the second prayer of the petitioner is concerned, I am of the view that interest of justice will be met if a direction is given to the Tribunal--Karnataka State Appellate ...

State Vs. Chikkarangaiah and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2002CriLJ1734

Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. This is an appeal against acquittal preferred by the State.2. The State being aggrieved by the Judgment and Order of acquittal rendered by the Sessions Judge, Tumkur, in S. C. No. 13/90 dated 22-4-1996, in acquitting the Respondents-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 341, IPC r/w. Section 149, IPC, Section 302 r/w. 149 IPC, Section 506 r/w. Section 149 IPC, Section 341 r/w. 149 IPC and 120(B) IPC and 302 r/w. 109 IPC, with respect to the deceased and Section 307 r/w. 149 IPC, with respect to P.W. 6 has preferred this appeal against acquittal.3. The prosecution case in brief is that A-1 to A-6, A-9 to A-13 and A-16 to A-21 are residents of Jodihosahalli, Kunigal Taluk, A-7 Kodakana Boraiah was a resident of Seeyepalya which is hardly one kilometre from Jodihosahalli. A-8-Kodakana Boralingaiah was a resident of Puranipalya which is about 1 1/2 kilometres from Jodihosahalli, A-14-Veerabhadraiah and A-15-Shivanna are residents of Hanumanapalya wh...

Caroline Perpetua Eardley Vs. Glenn B. Eardley and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: II(2002)DMC34; ILR2002KAR1618; 2002(2)KarLJ509

ORDERTirath S. Thakur, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against an order passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) and Principal Judicial Magistrate First Class, K.G.F., on an application under Section 36 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 seeking interim maintenance for the petitioner-wife. The application has by the said order been dismissed on the ground that the appellant-wife is in a position to maintain herself.2. The parties are Christians by faith. They appear to have tied the knot in the year 1984 and raised three children out of the wedlock, all of whom are females. The respondent-husband is a driller in an oil rig and appears to be in the employment of a company based in Abu Dhabi. He has in a petition under Sections 10 and 11 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, sought dissolution of marriage on the ground that the wife has committed adultery since the solemnisation of the marriage. The wife has denied the allegations and is resisting the prayer for divorce. The matter ...

M. Manoharan Vs. Syndicate Bank, Manipal and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2002KAR1028; 2002(2)KarLJ587

ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J. 1. This writ petition is filed praying for a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned communication dated 25-4-1997, produced as Annexure-M to the writ petition.2. The petitioner joined the services of the first respondent-Bank on 29-9-1975. On 29-10-1993 the first respondent-Bank entered into a settlement with its officers whereunder pension was introduced as a second retiral benefit in lieu of contributory provident fund. In pursuance of the said settlement the bank issued circular dated 7-6-1994 calling upon the officers to submit their option. The petitioner exercised his option to accept the pension in terms of his letter dated 30-9-1994. Certain changes were brought out in the pension scheme and consequent upon the changes introduced to the pension scheme, the Bank issued another circular dated 4-11-1995 (Annexure-D) permitting the officers to revoke the option exercised by them previously, if they so desired, on or before 29-11-1995 and the petition...

Vincent Britto Vs. Mrs. Eunice Britto

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2002Kant179; ILR2002KAR2455; 2002(2)KarLJ600

V.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This appeal under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore in O.S. No. 1 of 1988, dated 12-12-1994.2. The facts of the case in brief leading up to this appeal are as follows.-- The parties would be referred to with reference to their rank before the Probate Court.Vincent Britto, S/o. Denis J. Britto filed an application for grant of probate under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act before the District Judge, Dakshina Kannada on 7-3-1987 seeking for issue of probate annexed to the Will. It is averred in the application that Ms. Elizabeth Britto died on 17-9-1986 within the jurisdiction of District Court, Mangalore. She had executed last Will and testament in the presence of witnesses whose names appear on the foot thereof and the plaintiff is the Executor appointed under the Will since Mr. Ben Britto has declined to act as an executor by his let...

N. Gopal Vs. the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited, Ban ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2002(94)FLR354]; 2002(3)KarLJ156

ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. An ex-cashier of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited is questioning the order dated 8-11-2001, Annexure-D on the following facts.2. The petitioner joined the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (for short the 'Corporation') in the year 1968. He was promoted from time to time and as on the date of filing of the petition, he was working as a cashier. On 11-10-2001, a show-cause notice was issued to him asking to show cause as to why action could not be taken for his having committed certain irregularities in remittance of cash in terms of Annexure-B. A reply was sent by the petitioner in terms of Annexure-C. Simultaneously, the Corporation also initiated criminal proceedings. They have submitted a 'B' report in the matter. The same was accepted, Subsequently, the Board by an order dated 8-11-2001, ordered penalty of dismissal on the petitioner. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the same.3. The Counsel for the petitioner took...