Karnataka Court September 2002 Judgments
R. Manjunath Shetty Vs. the Catholic Board of Education
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KarLJ361
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. I have heard the learned Advocates on both sides on merits. It is unnecessary for me to recount the facts of this case because the petitioner before me who at the relevant time was a school teacher is alleged to have been involved in recurring acts of molestation and misbehaviour with a 15 year old girl student. The institution in question is a very reputed educational institution in the area. The incident had very serious repercussions and undoubtedly, an enquiry was held and the verdict of the enquiry went against the petitioner. The management issued a show-cause notice to him as is required and after considering his reply, an order of dismissal followed. This order was the subject-matter of challenge before the Education Appellate Tribunal. The order passed by the Tribunal has been perused by me because the Tribunal has meticulously examined all the heads of objection put up which mainly concerns various procedural requirement in relation to the conduct of the d...
Tag this Judgment!Cyprian D'Souza Vs. Smt. Rene D'Souza
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant64; I(2003)DMC409; ILR2002KAR5145; 2003(1)KarLJ401
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in O.S. No. 96 of 1996 on the file of Principal Judge, the Family Court. Bangalore, whereby the Family Court has rejected the plaint by allowing the application filed by the respondent-defendant under Order 7, Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. Aggrieved plaintiff who is also the husband of the respondent, is in appeal before us. The appeal had been initially preferred as a miscellaneous appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 and has been later permitted to be treated as an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, inasmuch as the rejection of the plaint amounts to a decree and the decree having been passed by the Family Court, a miscellaneous appeal under Section 19 alone was maintainable.3. Brief facts of the appeal are that the parties are husband and wife and are Christians by faith. The plaint averments inter alia indicated that in respect of the suit Schedule property viz., a residential house, the husband, plaintiff had claimed e...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ananda Lakshmi and anr. Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Mysore District ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR5199; 2003(1)KarLJ423
ORDERH. Rangavittalachar, J.1. Writ petitioners have challenged the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mysore District, dated 25-7-2002 declaring them as being disqualified to hold the office of Municipal Councillors, Town Municipal Council, Hunsur.Briefly stated the facts as gathered from the arguments and the records are:By a Gazette Notification, dated 8-5-2002 in ELN 90(1)/2000-01, the Deputy Commissioner, Mysore, notified 23 persons as elected members for the Town Municipal Council, Hunsur. As per the notification, 9 Councillors were from the Indian National Congress (referred to as 'INC' for brevity) including the writ petitioners herein, 8 from the Janata Dal (S), 3 from Bharatiya Janata Party and 3 independents among them being Ambi Sridhar and Hazrath Jan.2. For the post of President and the Vice-President of the Hunsur Municipal Council, elections were held on 30-12-2001. The INC had set up Smt. Ananda Lakshmi as its candidate for the post of President and Sri D. Naraya...
Tag this Judgment!Eralingappa and anr. Vs. Nagamma and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant201
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 11-7-2001 passed by the Prl. Civil Judge, Junior Division, Pavagada dismissing I. A. No. 9 in FDP 1/1999.2. The 1st petitioner is the husband and the 2nd petitioner is the son of one late Eramma. The petitioners have succeeded to the estate of deceased Eramma being her legal representatives. Except the petitioners, there are no other legal representatives left behind by the deceased. The said Eramma is the elder sister of the 1st respondent viz., Nagamma. The 1st respondent filed a suit for partition in O. S. No. 36/1987 on the file of the Munsiff and JMFC Pavagada against her mother Kenchamma, the deceased Eramma and others in respect of propertybearing Sy. No. 73 of Kyathaganahalli village, Pavagada taluk, measuring 1.12 acres and other properties claiming l/5th share in the land in question including the movables. The suit was decreed by order dated 22-12-1990. The 1st appellate Court affirmed the decre...
Tag this Judgment!P.R. Venugopal Vs. G.P. Rajashekar and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)KarLJ280
ORDER1. All these three revisions are considered together for passing common order since they involve similar question of law and fact. The petitioner in Cri. R.P. Nos. 822 and 820 of 1999 is common. Respondents 1 to 3 in Cri. R.P. Nos. 822 and 820 of 1999 are also common. In Cri. R.P. No. 821 of 1999 the petitioner and two respondents are different. The Inspector General of Lokayukta is one of the respondent common in all the petitions. The petitioners filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Cr. P.C. before the Special Judge-cum-Principal Sessions Judge, Raichur, under the Prevention of Corruption Act for prosecuting the respondents 1 to 3 in Cri. R.P. Nos. 820 and 822 of 1999 and respondents 1 and 2 in Cri. R.P. No. 821 of 1999. The Special Judge referred the complaint for investigation to the Inspector of Lokayukta, Raichur under Section 156(3) of the Cr. P.C. The Inspector, Lokayukta in turn entertaining doubt referred the matter to Inspector General of Police, Lokayukta...
Tag this Judgment!Kum. V.M. Nagamani Vs. University of Agricultural Sciences and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant68
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The petitioner is a resident of Jagalur and claim to be a person belonging to an agricultural family. The petitioner's case is that the father of the petitioner is an agriculturist and the agricultural income is the only source. The petitioner had her education from I Standard to II P.U.C. In Jagalur Town, the population of which is less than 50,000. She has secured 86.35 in P.C.B. As per the prospectus and instructions issued by the University, she applied for admission to B. V. Sc. Course along with the documents showing that she is coming from a rural area and an agricultural family. She appeared for the counselling on 20-9-2002 along with the documents. The respondents have refused to consider her application under the reservation category viz., rural quota or children of an agriculturist on the ground that the certificate produced by her is not countersigned by the appropriate authority, and the certificate produced by her to show that she is coming from an agr...
Tag this Judgment!Basha Alias Bashakhan and Etc. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ988
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This criminal reference arises pursuant to an order dated 29-10-2001 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court, wherein, he has referred the point of law to the Division Bench in the following circumstances. As far as the facts are concerned, it was alleged that on 9-12-1990 at about 4 p.m. the Inspector of Excise, DEIB, Bangalore, was on patrol duty and he received information that I.D. Liquor was loaded in an Ambassador Car bearing Registration N. MEQ 8699 at Bylanarasapura village, and that the same was being transported to Bangalore. The Officer sought the assistance of two panchas and kept a close watch whereupon at about 4.30 p.m. the Ambassador Car came hear Sandi Maidana, Hoskote, the Car was stopped and the contraband was found in the car and the occupants failed to produce any valid licence or permit for transporting the contraband. The occupants of the car were arrested and the car along with the contraband was seized. A charge-sheet was filed in C...
Tag this Judgment!B.H. Umashankar and ors. Vs. Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR329]; ILR2002KAR5361; 2002(6)KarLJ115
ORDERH.L. Dattu, J.1. The matter is listed in the orders list. By consent of the learned Counsels for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.2. Since common question of facts and law are involved in all these writ petitions, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed off by this common order.3. Petitioners are weighmen. They had a licence issued by the respondent-APMG in exercise of its powers under Rule 79 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Rules, 1968 ('Rules' for short). The life of the licence is only for an year. After the expiry of the licence period, petitioners-weigh men have approached the respondent-APMC for grant of a fresh licence/renewal for the period 2001-02. The request made by them was considered by the APMC in its meeting held on 15-5-2001. They have resolved that the request of the weighmen for renewal of licence would be considered, only if the weighmen undertake to execute an agreement, undertaking to follow the licensing...
Tag this Judgment!The Special Land Acquisition Officer, K.R. Project Vs. K. Basavanna
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)KarLJ392
Hon'ble Judges: B. Padmaraj, J.1. Heard the learned Government Advocate both on I.A. No. 1 of 2002 as well as on the question of admission of this miscellaneous second appeal filed by the appellant/LAO.2. The appellant/LAO on being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 18-12-2001 passed by the 1st Appellate Court whereby it has confirmed the judgment and award made by the reference Court fixing the compensation at Rs. 34,000/- per acre, has preferred this miscellaneous second appeal. The land belonging to the respondent/claimant situated at Kuntur Village in Mysore District was acquired by the appellant/LAO for the purpose of formation and distribution of house sites to the weaker section of the society under a preliminary notification dated 29-6-1978. The Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 12,000/- per acre. On reference, the reference Court determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 34,000/- per acre. On appeal by the app...
Tag this Judgment!The Special Land Acquisition Officer, K.R. Project Vs. Shivanna
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR4956; 2003(2)KarLJ404
B. Padmaraj, J.1. Heard the learned Government Advocate for the appellant-Land Acquisition Officer and carefully perused the case records including the judgments and awards made by both the Courts below.2. The appellant-L.A.O. has preferred this miscellaneous second appeal against the judgment and award dated 12-10-2001 of the first Appellate Court, whereby, it has confirmed the judgment and award made by the Reference Court and dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-L.A.O.3. The appellant herein had acquired an extent of 2 acres of land in Sy. No. 325 situated at Kesare Village, Mysore Taluk, for Varuna Canal Project and fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 14,100/-per acre. The respondent-claimant, not being satisfied with the award made by the L.A.O., sought for reference and on reference, the Reference Court on consideration of the entire materials placed on record, fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 54,856/- per acre in respect of the dry land an...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »