Karnataka Court September 2002 Judgments
K.G. Krishna Murthy Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-2002
Reported in: ILR2003KAR4721; (2004)ILLJ59Kant
ORDERGopala Gowda, J. 1. The petitioner was working in the 2nd respondent Canara Bank and retired on 30-9-1987. At the time there was no pension scheme in the Bank. The Pension scheme known as Canara Bank (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulation' or 'Pension Scheme') was introduced in the year 1995 and it came into force with effect from 29-9-1995 (Notified date), the date on which it was published in the official Gazette. The relevant portions of Clause III of the Regulation relating to their application and eligibility, which are necessary for the disposal of this Writ Petition, are extracted here under:-iii) The following categories of retirees and families of the deceased employees/deceased retired employees are also covered under the pension scheme. They have to exercise an option in writing within 120 days from the notified date (29-9-95) to become member of the pension fund and refund within 60 days after the expiry of the said period of...
Tag this Judgment!State by Thippagondanahalli Police Station Vs. Chikkabala Naika and or ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR5151; 2002(6)KarLJ165
1. This criminal appeal is filed challenging the judgment and order of acquittal in S.C. No. 62 of 1990 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, dated 20-12-1997. 2. The facts that lead to the filing of the present appeal are narrated as under: 3. The appellant herein registered a case against the respondents for offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 149, 324 and 307 of the IPC alleging that on 28-8-1988 at about 9.30 p.m. at Kalluthandya, the respondents herein formed themselves unlawful assembly with the common object of assaulting P.W. 10-Doddabala Naik, P.W. 1-Nagaraja Naik, P.W. 2-Krishna Naik, P.W. 4-Kamala Naik and P.W. 6-Sakribai in order to commit the murder of above said persons, assaulted them with clubs, stones etc., resulting in grievous injuries to them. 4. On the complaint of the complainant, P.W. 14, the Head Constable who was the Station House Officer, at the relevant point of time registered the case, condu...
Tag this Judgment!Bharath Gold Mines Limited Vs. Smt. Manimala and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ1216; [2002(95)FLR1145]; ILR2002KAR4480; 2002(6)KarLJ226
M.S. Rajendra Prasad, J. 1. This miscellaneous first appeal by the Bharath Gold Mines Limited, Oorgaum, K.G.F. filed under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 is directed against the order dated 25-1-2001 in W.C.A.F.C. 6 of 1999, on the file of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Kolar District, K.G.F., on the ground that the subject-matter of appeal involves substantial question of law. 2. The Court has heard the arguments of the learned Counsels appearing on both sides. 3. In view of the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and at the time of arguments, the following points would arise for consideration.-(1) Whether the appeal involves any substantial question oflaw? (2) What order? 4. Sri A.S. Bopanna, learned Counsel for the appellant, strenuously contended that the material on record shows that the order impugned is unsustainable in law and the medical evidence could not have been brushed aside by the Commissioner and further could not have observed th...
Tag this Judgment!ismail and ors. Vs. Sushila Bai and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)KarLJ476
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J. 1. This revision petition is filed by the legal representatives of the original tenant in H.R.C. No. 4 of 1988 on the file of Principal Munsiff, Bantwal, aggrieved by the order dated 13-4-1999 in Revision (Rent) Petition No. 54 of 1997 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Mangalore, allowing revision (rent) petition and directing the petitioners who are the legal representatives of the original tenant to vacate the Schedule premises by reversing the order dated 1-2-1997 in H.R.C. No. 4 of 1988 on the file of Principal Munsiff, Bantwal. 2. A few facts which are relevant for deciding the questions involved in this revision petition are stated herein. One Ummer Saheb was a tenant under the respondents 1 to 3 who are said to be the landownersof the Schedule property. The landowners who are referred to as landlords have filed H.R.C. No. 4 of 1988 under Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short) seeking eviction of the ...
Tag this Judgment!R.G. Hegde Vs. Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant22; ILR2002KAR4626
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. The petitioner seeks for a writ of certiorari quashing the letters bearing Nos. ACA/F/NS-37/99-2000/128 and No. ACA/F/PT-41/99-2000/126 dated 29-4-2000 produced as Annexures J-1 and J-2 to the writ petition and for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respond-ents to consider the letter of withdrawal dated 20-2-2000.2. The facts leading to this petition, briefly stated, are as under :The petitioner in pursuance of notification dated 25-8-1999 issued by the respondent inviting applications from existing colleges for starting new colleges or additional courses or for increase intake of Health Sciences for the year 1999-2000 approached the respondent and tendered two demand drafts of Rs. 1,00,000/- each drawn on Canara Bank, Sarakki Layout Branch, Bangalore favouring respondent and seeking fresh affiliation to start B. Sc. Nursing and B. Sc. Physiotherapy (Paramedical course). The local inquiry committee inspected the institution and submitted its...
Tag this Judgment!R.G. Hegde Vs. the Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Scienc ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)KarLJ469
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. The petitioner seeks for a writ of certiorari quashing the letters bearing Nos. ACA/F/NS-37/99-2000/128 and ACA/F/PT-41/99- 2000/126, dated 29-4-2000 produced as Annexures-J1 and J-2 to the writ petition and for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the letter of withdrawal dated 20-2-2000.2. The facts leading to this petition, briefly stated, are as under:The petitioner in pursuance of notification dated 25-8-1999 issued by the respondent inviting applications from, existing colleges for starting new colleges or additional courses or for increase in intake of Health Sciences for the year 1999-2000, approached the respondent and tendered two demand drafts of Rs. 1,00,000/- each drawn on Canara Bank, Sarakki Layout Branch, Bangalore, favouring respondent and seeking fresh affiliation to start B.Sc. (Nursing) and B.Sc. (Physiotherapy) (Paramedical course). The local inquiry committee inspected the institution and submitted ...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar and anr. Vs. Kothandapani
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)KarLJ306
ORDERB. Padmaraj, J. 1. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioners and carefully perused the case papers including the impugned order made by the Trial Court.2. The petitioners herein are the defendants before the Trial Court, while the respondent is the plaintiff. The respondent-plaintiff has filed a suit for the relief of permanent injunction in respect of certain property alleging that the suit property belongs to him and that the petitioners herein have no manner of right, title or interest thereover, but, in spite of that they were making hurried attempt to put up construction in the suit property. On these averments made in the plaint, the respondent-plaintiff sought for the relief of permanent injunction against the petitioners herein. During the pendency of the suit, the respondent-plaintiff filed an application in I.A. No. VII under Order 6, Rule 17 of the CPC seeking additional relief of mandatory injunction on the ground that the petitioners herein have p...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Thilothamma and anr. Vs. Smt. Rahmathunnisa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR4846; 2002(6)KarLJ368
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J. 1. This revision by the tenants under Section 50 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 is preferred against the order dated 19-1-2000 passed in H.R.C. No. 10484 of 1999 on the file of XV Additional Small Causes Judge, Bangalore. 2. The respondent-landlord filed the petition for eviction of the tenants under Section 21(1)(f) and (j) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (Karnataka Act 22 of 1961). She put forth the case in the eviction petition that the husband of the first petitioner, one S.M.A. Hameed was a tenant in a portion of premises bearing No. 4, Mosque Road, Frazer Town, Bangalore, and subsequent to his death the first petitioner continued in occupation of the premises on a monthly rent of Rs. 95/- excluding light and water charges. It is the case of the respondent that the premises is in a dilapidated condition and it is required to be demolished and reconstructed. The respondent claimed to have sufficient funds at her disposal for putting up...
Tag this Judgment!C. Lakshminarayana Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2087
ORDERK. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. This revision is filed against the order of the Deputy Conservator of Forests cum Authorised Forest Officer in Order No. AA:UPA:A:SAM:BEM:358:96-97 dated 30-9-1996, where under the rose wood measuring 2.583 Cft, belonging to the petitioner came to be confiscated.2. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal before the learned City Civil & Sessions Judge. The learned trial Judge, while dismissing the appeal confirmed the order of the Court below. Hence this revision.3. According to the prosecution version, on 25-1-1994, on credible information, the mobile squad of the Forest Department conducted a raid on the premises bearing No. 25, situated at 4th Cross, Malleswaram, belonging to the petitioner. The Forest Authorities found that the petitioner was in possession of 2.583 cft. of rose wood pieces. He did not have necessary permit or license for such possession and he was also not able to properly account the source for possession. Accordingly, a case i...
Tag this Judgment!Vijayakumar Vs. Suresh and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-16-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)KarLJ223
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 16-11-2000 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sedam, on LA. No. II in O.S. No. 146 of 1995.2. The first respondent herein has filed an application under Order 1, Rule 9 of the CPC seeking permission to amend the plaint and also to implead the proposed defendants in the suit.3. The petitioner has filed objections to the said application stating that the application is not maintainable and is liable to be rejected keeping in view the relevant provisions of the Act and further he stated that in one application, the respondent cannot claim more than one relief and it is totally barred under Rule 23 of the Karnataka Civil Rules of Practice.4. The Trial Court after hearing both the parties and considering the material on record allowed the application filed by the first respondent permitting him to amend the plaint and also to implead the additional defendants in the said suit. Assailing the correctnes...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »