Karnataka Court October 2002 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Kirloskar Electric Company Limited Vs. Nil
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KarLJ556
ORDERH.L. Dattu, J.1. Kirloskar Electric Company has filed this company petition under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('Act', for short), inter alia requesting this Court to sanction the scheme of arrangement annexed as Annexure-B to the petition, so that the same becomes binding on all the shareholders, creditors of the petitioner-company as well as on the petitioner-company.2. The petitioner-company was incorporated as a public limited company on 26th day of July, 1946 under the provisions of the Mysore Companies Act, 1938, under the name and style of M/s. Kirloskar Electric Company Limited. Its registered office is situate at the Industrial Suburb, Rajajinagar, Bangalore. The authorised share capital of the company is Rs. 700,000,000 (Rupees seven hundred million) divided into 40,000,000 (forty million) equity shares of Rs. 10/- each and 3,000,000 (three million) preference shares of Rs. 100/- each. The issued, Subscribed and paid up share capital is Rs. 25,268,817 (...
irappa and anr. Vs. the Managing Director, Ksrtc
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ1612; 2003(3)KarLJ364
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned Counsel for the respondent. Perused the affidavit filed in support of I.A. No. I filed for condonation of delay of 645 days in filing the appeal. In the facts and circumstances of the case, delay stands condoned.2. The appeal is taken up for final disposal.3. The claimants have preferred this appeal against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gadag in M.V.C. No. 116 of 1996 for enhancement of compensation. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 57,000/- with 12% interest.4. The facts very briefly are.-On 3-4-1995 the deceased Anasawwa aged about 12 years was going to kadhara for work. She was standing at the bus stop along with her father, the first petitioner. At about 9.00 a.m. a KSRTC bus driven by the driver in a rash and negligent manner, ran over the deceased and the deceased died on the spot. The parents of the deceased were the claimants. The case of the claimants was that the decease...
C.M. Mahantkumar Vs. Ngef Limited and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)KarLJ554
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioner in this petition is seeking to quash the order dated 12-10-2000 vide Annexure-J. He is also seeking for a direction to the respondent-company to consider his case for availing the benefit of voluntary retirement as per scheme at Annexure-E. 2. Petitioner is an Engineer and he completed his post-graduation from the Indian Institute of Science. He joined Bharath Electronics Limited, Bangalore and thereafter he joined the respondent-company as Deputy Manager in Research and Development Division. He was promoted as Manager and thereafter as Senior Manager, He was transferred to the Sales Department. According to him this transfer is wholly unwarranted. He refers to the correspondence between the parties. Petitioner submitted a letter of resignation at Annexure-B. The same was accepted. According to him, when he resigned the Voluntary Retirement Scheme was not available and subsequently, the same was made available. He submitted several letters, and the sa...
R.S. Trikannad Vs. Vijaya Bank
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-21-2002
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR790]; ILR2004KAR1482; 2003(2)KarLJ626
ORDERR.S. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioner is before me seeking for a writ of certiorari to quash an order dated 14-2-2000 with a further direction to pay to the petitionerpension and other benefits like payment of commutation etc., with effect from 1-11-1993 together with interest.2. Petitioner joined the services of the Bank in the year 1944. The service condition of the petitioner was covered by Regulation 19 of the Vijaya Bank Officers' Service Regulations, 1982. They came into force from 1-1-1983. The age of retirement of an officer of the Bank is as determined by the Board in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government from time to time. The Government of India issued guidelines under which the age of retirement shall be 60 years of age for those officers who were recruited or promoted prior to 19-7-1969. The order of the Bank is filed at Annexure-A. Petitioner retired on 31-12-1985. Petitioner refers to the discussions between the workmen and officers of the industry with ...
Smt. Muthamma Vs. the Special Dy. Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-21-2002
Reported in: ILR2004KAR107
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. In this Writ Petition the petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Deputy Commissioner to accept the conversion fine and to issue Conversion Certificates pursuant to the notice at Annexure-A dated 1.4.1997 issued by the respondent.2. Statement of objections is filed on behalf of the respondent stating that despite notice as Annexure-A the petitioner did not pay the conversion charges despite a further notice dated 18.7.1998. It is stated that petitioner having slept over the matter for over five years, has no right in the matter. It is further stated that the land in question is abutting the Government Flying Training School, Jakkur Aerodrome and the authorities have requested the Revenue authorities not to grant permission for conversion and hence no permission for conversion is granted. Consequently, the respondent has prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition.3. It is an admitted fact that permission for conversion of the land of the petition...
Lalita and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-11-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KarLJ406
ORDERChandrashekaraiah, J.1. In these writ petitions the petitioners have sought for a declaration that the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 (Amendment) (Act 16 of 1997) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Highways Act'), are unconstitutional and for quashing of the notifications dated 2-2-1999 and 15-9-1999 issued under Sections 3-A(1) and 3-D of the Highways Act.2. Though the petitioners have challenged all the provisions of the Act 16 of 1997, have confined their argument only insofar as it relates to exclusion of the application of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'LA Act').3. Sri Kothavale, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Parliament has no power to enact a law called the Highways Act, for the purpose of acquisition of land, which is diametrically opposed to the LA Act. In support of his contention he has referred to the provisions of the Act, with reference to the LA Act and submits that the provision...
Shilpi Papachar Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-11-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant111
ORDERR. Gururajan, J. 1. The petitioner, a devotee is before me and is questioning in his personal capacity the order at Annexure-'A' dated 18-2-2000 passed by the respondent. The facts in brief are as under : The petitioner has allegiance to Dharmadarshi of Papagni Math (for short the Math). It is a religious institute working for the welfare of Vishwakarma community of Hindu Religion. Vishwakarma community are engaged in the handicrafts of Goldsmith in addition to sculpture and other activities. The Math is in existence over 1000 years, according to the petition averments. There are several idols and Samadhi of the previous Swamiji of their sect. Their main god is Bhoganandhishwara. The deity is worshipped by Vishwakarma devotees. The Math did not have religious head like swamiji either for preaching or religious activities. There is no history of Mathadhipathi of this Institution. The third respondent, Keshavachar belongs to Vishwakarma community. According to the petitioner, he mis...
The Gadag Co. Operative Cotton Sale Society Ltd., by Its General Manag ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-10-2002
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2644
ORDERPadmaraj, J.1. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of both sides, the revision petition itself is taken up for final disposal and the same is accordingly disposed of by this Order.2. The petitioner herein is defendant no. 4 before the Trial Court, whereas, the first respondent is the plaintiff and the respondent Nos.2 to 4 are the defendant Nos. 1 to 3. The real contest is only between the petitioner and the first respondent herein and respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are only formal parties and their presence may not be needed to dispose of this revision petition. Under the circumstances, therefore, I have heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 at a considerable length and carefully perused the entire case papers including the impugned Order made by the Trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court in appeal.3. The first respondent-plaintiff has filed the suit before the Trial Court against t...
Narasamma and ors. Vs. M. Saibaba and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-10-2002
Reported in: 2004ACJ1608
Saldanha, J.1. An interesting point has fallen for decision in this appeal, which basically revolves around the question as to whether the status of a passenger continues if the passenger has indicated an intent to leave the vehicle in which the passenger was travelling and whether the extended principle which has been held applicable in certain cases for certain reasons that the status will hold good to situations where the injury has been caused in the process of alighting, would also cover a case where injury has occurred immediately after the person has alighted. We shall briefly recount the facts giving rise to this controversy. One Hussainappa who was aged approximately 60 years had travelled in a goods vehicle, viz., a truck on the evening of 17.7.1993 and this vehicle stopped near a Mutt at which time Hussainappa got down from the truck in question. There is some slight ambiguity with regard to exactly how the injury was sustained but the wife and minor children who are the cla...
Rainbow Advertising Vs. Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-09-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)KarLJ623
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. The petitioners are registered advertising agencies involved in the business of installing advertisement hoardings for their clients. After entering into agreement with the owners of the properties the petitioners had filed their applications before the respondents seeking permission for the erection of the hoardings. These applications had been considered and orders had been passed by the respondents permitting the petitioners to erect hoardings. As the term of the permission/license originally granted under the Act is limited to one year, on the expiry of the one year period, the petitioners made applications for renewal along with the requisite fee. The respondents have declined in all these cases to renew the permission earlier granted on one ground or the other. Being aggrieved by the said refusal to renew the permission or licence earlier granted, these petitions have been filed by the aggrieved petitioners.2. I have heard learned Counsels Mr. Vish...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »