Karnataka Court August 2002 Judgments
Ekanath Ekbote Vs. the Gulbarga University and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-17-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR4322; 2002(5)KarLJ315
1. This writ appeal is filed against the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 17-7-2001 (Ekanath Ekbote v. Gulbarga University and Anr., 2001(5) Kar. L.J. 374), wherein the learned Single Judge did not interfere with the impugned orders at Annexures-E and F and dismissed the petition holding that the appointment of the second respondent was neither illegal nor invalid.2. The brief facts are that 1st respondent-University issued a notification dated 19-1-1994 inviting applications for various posts but the same was not acted upon by the 1st respondent, and subsequently it issued another notification dated 1-6-1994 in respect of the same posts for which applications were called for in the earlier notification. In pursuance of the notification dated 1-6-1994, the appellant and 4 others applied for the post of Professor in the 1st respondent-University. The Syndicate of the University having accepted the recommendations of the Board of Appointment in its meeting held on 31-5-1995, on t...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of India and ors. Vs. D.K. Seetharam
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR614]; 2002(5)KarLJ347; (2002)IIILLJ1023Kant
Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. The State Bank of India being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 15896 of 1996, dated 9-2-1999 has preferred this writ appeal. 2. The facts very briefly are.-The respondent was working as a clerk with the appellant-Bank. He remained absent continuously from 28-3-3994. The respondent was served with a notice on 22-11-1994 giving him time of 30 days to report for duty and explain the cause for his unauthorised absence. This notice was given to the respondent under the terms of the bipartite settlement governing the service conditions of the staff. In spite of service of notice the respondent failed to report for duty within the stipulated time. He also did not submit any explanation for his unauthorised absence. Accordingly, the appellants removed him from the rolls. 3. Aggrieved by his removal from service the respondent challenged the endorsement issued to him by the Bank treating him as having abandoned the service with the Bank in W....
Tag this Judgment!G.R. Changalaraya Naidu and ors. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner and an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR4467; 2002(6)KarLJ208
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. The petitioners are before this Court challenging the order of the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal, dated 28-2-2002 passed in Appeal No. 112 of 1991. The facts in brief are as under:2. The petitioners are close friends and they come from agricultural family. They purchased jointly the lands in Sy. No. 14/1B measuring 3.05 acres of Raghavanahalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, on 13-5-1987 under a registered sale deed from Sri Rama Rao. They are in possession and cultivation of the same. The Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore, issued preliminary notification on 23-3-1989 for acquiring these lands for the purpose of providing the same to Kammavari Sangham, an educational institution. Proceedings were already pending before the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner has initiated proceedings for contravention of Sections 79-B and 81 of the Land Reforms Act. In the light of a report from the Tahsildar, the Assistant Commissioner pass...
Tag this Judgment!Shafiulla Rahim Khan Vs. the High Court of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALT(Cri)454; 2002CriLJ4774; ILR2002KAR4351
ORDER1. In these petitions (PIL), the petitioners have sought quashing of Circular No. HCE 727 of 1994, dated 28-3-1998 [as amended by Circular No. HCE 272 of 1994, dated 30-3-1998], issued by the Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Karnataka. The said amended circular reads as follows: 'HCE 727 of 1994 High Court of Karnataka,Bangalore. Dated 28-3-1998CIRCULAR In enclosing herewith an extract of paras 13 and 16 and the order portion in the order passed in Criminal Petition Nos. 2720 and 2789 of 1995, DD: 26-2-1998, the Section Officer, Receiving and Scrutiny Branch of this office is directed to act upon the directions issued in the above criminal petitions under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. in respect of the matters indicated therein. 'Further, not to receive any such petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. henceforth' '. 2. The relevant portion of the order of the learned Judge in the case of Kamalanjanamma and Ors. v. State of Karnataka and Anr., in compliance of which the ...
Tag this Judgment!Chandramma Vs. Ramachandra and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR4612; 2002(6)KarLJ212
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. In this revision petition the order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, rejecting the application of the petitioner to release the amount in deposit is questioned.2. The amount in deposit is Rs. 54, 750/-. The Tribunal rejected the application on the ground that the amount is kept in deposit with a view to give perennial income to the petitioner and the said amount cannot be diverted. Another ground on which the application was rejected is that same quantum of amount was released on 19-7-1996.3. The reasons assigned by the Tribunal for rejecting the application are totally untenable. The petitioner underwent kidney operation for which she has raised loans. Bills amounting to about Rs. 49,000/- have been produced before me in proof of the treatment taken. In such a distress condition the petitioner sought release of the amount in deposit. When the petitioner is struggling for life and money for treatment, amount in deposit will not come to her rescu...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of Hyderabad Vs. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)KarLJ174
ORDERH. Rangavittalachar, J.1. The State Bank of Hyderabad has filed this petition against the interim order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bangalore, on I.A. No. 5, dated 31-7-1998 and confirmed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Bombay in Appeal No. 354 of 1998.2. The writ petitioner filed an application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal in O.A. No. 725 of 1997 against respondents 4 to 8 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 48,00,205/-. The Bank also obtained an interim order dated 7-7-1997 under which the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, 10th respondent herein was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 9,98,000/- with the Bank. Meanwhile, one Sri G. Sambaiah claiming to be the creditor of one M. Krishna Reddy, 2nd respondent before the Tribunal, had obtained a prohibitory order in O.S. No. 1183 of 1997 in the City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against the very Singareni Collieries under Order 38, Rule 5 of the CPC not to part with the said money. Since there were two conflicting or...
Tag this Judgment!Kaleem Alias Kaleem Pasha Vs. State by Central Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)13; 2003CriLJ353; ILR2002KAR4609; 2003(1)KarLJ224
ORDERS.R. Bannurmath, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.2. The petitioner and others are the accused in Crime No. 65 of 2002 for the offences under Sections 363 and 392 of the IPC. Immediately after the arrest, the petitioner and other accused have sought for releasing them on bail. Considering the rival contentions, the learned Magistrate by the order dated 7-6-2002 allowed the application and ordered releasing of the petitioner and others on bail on the following conditions:1. Accused 1 to 5 are released on bail on each of them furnishing personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each.2. Accused 1 to 5 shall deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000/- cash within one month from the day of release.3. Accused 1 to 5 shall mark their attendance before Central Police Station, for 3 months or till laying of the charge-sheet whichever is earlier, every Sunday in-between 10 -12 a.m.4. Accused 1 to 5...
Tag this Judgment!Steel Authority of India Limited and anr. Vs. S.K. Somanath
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR4546; 2003(2)KarLJ518; (2003)ILLJ1108Kant
Kumar Rajaratnam, J. 1. The appellant in this appeal has challenged the validity and correctness of the order dated 18-9-1998 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 2237 of 1992.2. The facts very briefly are that the respondent was working as an Assistant Sales Manager in Visvesvaraya Iron and Steel Limited, Madras Branch and was later posted at Branch Office, Madras, as Branch Manager.3. Three domestic enquiries were conducted against the respondent for certain serious acts of misconducts, such as misappropriation and acts of indiscipline. The respondent was kept under suspension with effect from 23-12-1981 and later dismissed from service from 25-9-1982. The respondent filed an appeal which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority.4. As stated there were three domestic enquiries. Enquiry Nos. 1771 of 1981, 20 and 106 of 1982.5. Enquiry No. 1771 of 1981 related to the period when the respondent was working as Branch Manager at Madras during 1980-81. The respondent is ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Hemavathy K. Vs. N. Ashok Kumar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC478; ILR2002KAR4165; 2002(5)KarLJ360
Tirath S. Thakur, J. 1. This appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is directed against an order passed by the I Additional Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, whereby M.C. No. 1074 of 1995 filed by the respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for restitution of conjugal rights has been dismissed as withdrawn without considering the counter-claim made by the appellant herein. The facts leading to the filing of the petition and the present appeal may be briefly set out as under: The parties are Hindus by faith. They got married to each other on 4-9-1987 at Tirupattur in Tamil Nadu. Differences it appears surfaced between the couple because of which they have been living separately. Since the appellant was unable to maintain herself, she filed Cr. Mis. No. 92 of 1995 and P. Mis. No. 8 of 1995 before the Additional Family Court at Bangalore for the grant of maintenance. The respondent-husband on the contrary filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Lal Alias Ramesh Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and anr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ134; ILR2002KAR5119; 2002(6)KarLJ82
1. These two appeals arise out of an order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Bangalore in M.V.C. No. 2081 of 1995 whereby a sum of Rs. 6,35,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. has been awarded as compensation for the injuries sustained by the claimant in a motor vehicle accident. While M.F.A. No. 3446 of 1997 filed by the National Insurance Company Limited seeks dismissal of the claim petition or reduction of the amount awarded to the claimant. M.F.A. No. 3767 of 1997 filed by the claimant seeks a suitable enhancement of the award amount.2. The claimant was on 2-6-1995 travelling by an autorickshaw bearing registration No. CAA 774. When the autorickshaw reached near Bannerghatta Main Road, it collided with a motor-car bearing registration No. KA 04 M 4002 resulting in the death of the autorickshaw driver and serious injuries to the claimant. The claimant was shifted to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital for treatment, where X-rays confirmed fractures of left L-2 vertebra and 4th right ri...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »