Karnataka Court November 2003 Judgments
Shivaraj Vs. Gurudeva
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)10; II(2004)BC146; ILR2003KAR5168
ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent.2. The brief facts are that being aggrieved by the issue of process by the I Adl.C.J.(Jr.Dn.) Gadag, in respect of the alleged offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 IPC. The petitioner has filed this petition wherein the private complaint has been filed by the respondent under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and it is alleged that the accused obtained a hand loan for his family necessity on 20.12.2000 and executed a hand loan agreement in favour of the respondent and also agreed to return the same within three months from the date of agreement and had also issued a cheque drawn on Canara Bank dt. 20.3.01. The said cheque when presented on 20.5.2001 was returned with an endorsement 'exceeds arrangements'. Thereafter, a legal notice was served on 2.6.01. Inspite of service of notice, no payment has been made, hence ...
Tag this Judgment!Management of M.S. Ramaiah Medical College and Hospital Vs. Dr. M. Som ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR37; 2004(1)KarLJ532
R.V. Raveendran, J. 1. The respondent was earlier working as a Professor and Head of the Department of Forensic Medicine in M.S. Ramaiah Medical College - the appellant herein. The appellant issued the following order dated 12-10-2002 to the respondent.--'On a review of the organisation structure of the Department of Forensic Medicine of M.S. Ramaiah Medical College, it has been decided that the service of Dr. Somashekar, Professor and Head of the Department of Forensic Medicine of M.S. Ramaiah Medical College, are no longer required by the institution.In terms of the letter of appointment dated 28th November, 1984, a crossed cheque bearing No. 777794, dated 12th October, 2002 for Rs. 84,922.50 drawn on Vijaya Bank, Yeshwanthpur Branch, Bangalore-560022 being the salary for three months in lieu of 3 month's notice, is enclosed.The Management expresses its gratitude for the services rendered to the institution'.2. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent approached the Educational Appellate Tr...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka State Financial Corporation Vs. K.M. Somashekar and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR50; 2004(1)KarLJ207
ORDER1. R.F.A. No. 318 of 1991 was posted for orders on 27-5-1998 for filing of paper books as well as for furnishing fresh process fee and correct addresses for service of notices upon the respondents. At the request of the Counsel for the appellant, two weeks time was granted for that purpose. The appellant it appears did not do the needful with the result that the matter was posted again on 8-10-1998 for orders. On that day, this Court granted 4 weeks further time as prayed for by the appellant for taking steps failing which the appeal was to stand dismissed without any further reference to the bench. The appellant it appears did not comply with the said order also which being peremptory in nature, the failure resulted in the dismissal of the appeal A civil petition was thereafter filed by the appellant seeking recall of the dismissal order in which it was inter alia pointed out that the matter had been settled by the parties outside the Court and that the appellant was entitled to ...
Tag this Judgment!M. Nataraj and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)KarLJ297
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Petitioners are members of the 3rd respondent-association, a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. Petitioners claim that they were the office-bearers in the committee of management that had been elected by the general body in an election that had been held during the year 1997 and were in office, when the term was put to a premature end by the Government appointing an Administrator to look after the affairs of the association in the light of certain allegations levelled against the committee of management that there were manipulation of accounts etc.2. It appears that the Administrator in due course ensured that fresh elections were held, for electing a new committee and handed over charge to the new committee. The association represented by the Honorary Secretary, who is arrayed as a 3rd respondent is one such office-bearer, elected in the subsequent elections during the regime of the Administrator.3. It is the versio...
Tag this Judgment!The Hanuman Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Regional Transpor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant164
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. These petitions are filed challenging the order of the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal passed in Appeal No. 1495/2002 and No. 1496/2000 dated 29-5-2003.2. Facts in brief in W.P. No. 34855-56 of 2003 are as under :Sri Manamohan Shetty, third respondent, is a holder of stage carriage permit No. 67/ 93-94 operating on the route Sringeri to Shimoga and back via Udupi in the aforesaid permit vehicle bearing No. KA 20:2511. Third respondent has filed an application on 20-3-1998 for grant of replacement of the vehicle by a later model vehicle under Section 83 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short). While considering the said application, second respondent, the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Shimoga, granted permission by an order dated 20-3-1998. A condition was imposed on third respondent to produce the vehicle within 60 days from the date of the order of replacement i.e. on or before 19-4-1998. He must also obtain an endorsement of r...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Ramachandra Joshi Vs. the Karnataka State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-10-2003
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR657]; 2004(1)KarLJ228
ORDERH.L. Dattu, J. 1. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in all these writ petitions, they are all clubbed together, heard and disposed off by this common order.2. For the purpose of narration of facts, I have taken into consideration the facts stated by the petitioner in W.P. No. 6013 of 1993.3. Petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Mechanical Engineer by a Competent Authority of the respondent-the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation ('the Corporation' for short), by issuing a letter of appointment dated 1-1-1982.4. While working in that capacity, an order came to be made by the respondent-Corporation dated 14-11-1992 directing the petitioner to work as Divisional Mechanical Engineer (Officiating) against the posts created temporarily for a period of three months. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, petitioner got himself relieved from Bagalkot Division on 16-11-1992 and reported at the Bijapur Division.5. Within three months from the date of posting as Divisi...
Tag this Judgment!The State, by Deputy Superintendent of Police Vs. Sree Rama Reddy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-10-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR5132; 2004(3)KarLJ206
ORDERRamanna, J. 1. Heard2. This revision is directed against the order dated 17.4.2001 passed by the Special Judge, Bangalore Urban and Rural District, Bangalore City, in Crl. Mis No. 359/2001 whereby the Special Judge allowed the application filed by the respondent and directed the revision petitioner - Lokayukta to release cash of Rs. 1,03,250/- to the interim custody of this respondent on his executing an indemnity bond with one solvent surety. Feeling aggrieved by the said order the State has come up with this revision mainly on the ground that the cash ordered to be released by the Special Judge is required for identification.3. The case of revision petitioner - State is that the respondent is working as a Revenue Inspector. On 4.1.2000 the Lokayukta Police have raided the house of the respondent and seized the cash, articles, documents, etc. and found property worth Rs. 85,50,000/- disproportionate to his known sources of income. Therefore the cash of Rs. 1,03,250/- have been se...
Tag this Judgment!Balappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-10-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR586; 2004(2)KarLJ285
Bannurmath, J.1. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment of conviction dated 29th June 2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Koppal, in Session Case No. 59/2000 finding the accused/appellant guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 203 IPC., and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 100/- for the offence under Section 302 IPC., and simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 203 IPC.The brief facts as per the prosecution case are as follows: -2. The accused Balappa was the husband of deceased Devamma, who was the daughter of Mahadevappa P.W.1. It is not in dispute that both Mahadevappa on one hand and the deceased on the other were staying in Kustagi though in different houses at a short distanceof a furlong or so. According to the prosecution the accused was of suspicious mind and was infact suspecting the fidelity of his wife.1473651493022013. During the investigation, P.W. 13 has recorded the statements of vari...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka Vs. Rangappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-10-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3720
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The State has assailed the order of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in favour of the respondent-Rangappa. The main allegation against him was that on 26-3-1999 at about 10.45 a.m. the accused is alleged to have shot at complainant -Dattu with a country pistol causing injuries to P.W. 1-Dattu. The injured person was first taken to his house then to a private hospital and then to the Government hospital where minor surgery was required to be done where 35 small pellets were removed from his back. According to the evidence of the Doctor P. W. 8 there was also a fracture of the shoulder bone. The complainant has indicated the background to the incident which indicates that there was some kind of unpleasantness between the mother of the accused and the complainant and it appears that the accused had attacked P. W. 1 because of the background of hostility. P.W.2 who is the cousin of P. W. 1 has stated that she witnessed the incident and she saw the accused firing at...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mallamma Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-07-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR157
ORDERRajendra Prasad, J. 1. Though the matter is listed for admission, by consent of both sides, the matter is taken up for final disposal.2. This petition, by accused No. 2, is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order dt. 31-10-2003 passed by the XXIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, in SC No. 460/96, and to direct the Trial Court to secure the presence of DW4 and to proceed with the case, challenging the legality and validity of the proceedings.3. The Court has heard the arguments of Sri C.H. Hanumantharaya, the learned Counsel on behalf of the petitioner and Sri C. Ramakrishna, HCGP on behalf of respondent - State.4. The learned Counsel for petitioner strenuously contended that the material on record clearly goes to show that the order impugned is illegal and invalid. The learned Sessions Judge had failed to afford full and fair opportunity to the petitioner to prove the defence side and for no fault of the petitioner process had not been serve...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »