Karnataka Court December 2003 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.
Appaji Vs. M. Krishna
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: II(2005)ACC591
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. This Miscellaneous First Appeal is directed against a Judgment & Award made by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, whereby MVC No. 936/1997 has been allowed in part and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. awarded as compensation for the death of late Sri Arun Kumar in a road accident.2. The deceased Sri Arun Kumar was on 8.7.1997 riding a scooter on his way from Maddur to Malavalli. When he reached a place near the Sugarcane Mill owned by one Sri Malleshanna situate on the said road, he met with an accident resulting in his death. A claim petition in MVC No. 936/1997 was presented by the parents of the deceased for payment of compensation. According to the averments made in the said claim petition, the deceased was engaged as a driver by respondent No. 1, the owner of the scooter involved in the accident and the accident in question had taken place while the deceased was trying to avoid a cyclist who had sud...
i. Varalakshmi and ors. Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ384; ILR2004KAR815
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Rural District, has dismissed a claim petition filed by the appellant for payment of compensation for the death of Sri Lakshminarayana in a road accident, holding that the same did not arise out of use of a motor vehicle. The correctness of that Order has been assailed by the appellants in the present case.2. The deceased Sri Lakshminarayana was on 7-5-1992 travelling by a Super Delux bus owned by the respondent Corporation from Secunderabad to Mysore. When the bus reached Baralagurki village on the Bangalore-Bellary Road at about 4.30 a.m. a stone hurled the at wind-screen of the bus, smashed the glass and hit the deceased on his forehead. The deceased was immediately rushed to Devanahalli Government Hospital for treatment, from where he appears to have been referred to Bangalore. On his way to Bangalore for further treatment, the deceased breathed his last. MVC No. 1331/1992 was filed by the widow and the two sons of th...
J.M. Narayana and ors. Vs. Corporation of the City of Bangalore, by It ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2005KAR60
ORDERTirath S. Thakur, J.1. This appeal arises out of a Judgment and Decree passed by the I Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, in O.S. No. 4164/1986, which happened to be a suit for declaration with consequential relief of possession. One of the issues that the Trial Court framed on the basis of the pleadings before it related to the sufficiency of the Court Fee paid on the plaint filed by the appellant. While dismissing the suit on merits, the Trial Court recorded a clear finding to the effect that the Court Fee paid by the plaintiff was insufficient and that the plaintiff is liable to pay the same on the market value of the suit property, which value was held to be at Rs. 65/- per sq. ft.2. In the present appeal filed against the said Judgment and Decree, the Office has raised two folded objections. The first objection relates to the non-filing of the certified copy of the decree sheet of the Trial Court, while the second objection relates to the non-payment of Court fee on the ...
Kalasa Tea Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. Cct
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: [2004]135TAXMAN105(Kar)
ORDERP. Vishwanath Shetty, J.In these petitions filed under section 55(1) of the Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act), the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') has called in question the correctness of the order dated 16-10-1995 made in No. AIR SR 1/95/96 by the Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax, Karnataka, Bangalore, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-M to these petitions.2. Facts in brief may be stated as hereunder:The assessee is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 in the State of Tamilnadu and has inter alia tea plantation in the District of Chickmagalur in the State of Karnataka. The assessee had filed its return of agricultural income in Form No. 3 under the Act for the assessment years 1981-82, 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1984-85. The assessing authority, on consideration of the return filed by the assessed, passed an order of assessment dated 31-5-1989 under section 19(3)...
Appaji (Since Deceased) and anr. Vs. M. Krishna and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1289
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. This miscellaneous first appeal is directed against a judgment and award made by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, whereby M.V.C. No. 936 of 1997 has been allowed in part and a sum of Rs. 50,000 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum awarded as compensation for the death of late Arun Kumar in a road accident.2. The deceased Arun Kumar was on 8.7.1997 riding a scooter on his way from Maddur to Malavalli. When he reached a place near the Sugarcane Mill owned by one Malleshanna situated on the said road, he met with an accident resulting in his death. A claim petition in M.V.C. No. 936 of 1997 was presented by the parents of the deceased for payment of compensation. According to the averments made in the said claim petition, the deceased was engaged as a driver by respondent No. 1, the owner of the scooter involved in the accident and the accident in question had taken place while the deceased was trying to avoid a cycl...
K.V. Rajasekarappa Vs. the Tahasildar and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-16-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR478
ORDER1. This Reference has been placed before us today as per the order of the Chief Justice dated 8.12.2003.2. The necessary facts of the case are:The land in Sy. No. 286 of Kotekere Village, Gundlupet taluk was granted during 1960-61 in favour of Dodda Madaiah as a lease grant and subsequently it was granted by the Deputy Commissioner by order dated 8.12.1963. Thereafter the said land was purchased by the petitioner under a registered sale deed on 3.2.1975 and is in possession of the same. However, the Tahsildar initiated enquiry for the alleged violation of the terms of grant. The 2nd respondent - Asst. Commissioner vide order dated 19.12.1963 has held that the sale is in violation of the provisions of Karnataka Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act. On appeal being filed, the Deputy Commissioner dismissed the said appeal on 28.2.2001. The same was challenged in Writ Petition. The learned Single Judge by a detailed order considered that the...
K.T. Venkatappa, Since Deceased by His Lrs. and ors. Vs. the Land Trib ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-16-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1471
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. This petitioner has preferred this petition against the order passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Bangalore in Appeal No. LRA 276/87 affirming the order dated 4.11.1986 passed by the Land Tribunal in LRF No. 342/74-75 and LRF No. 1253/75-76.2. Respondent No.2 filed the Form No. 7 in respect of lands measuring 4 acres and 24 guntas in Sy.No.2 and lands measuring 2 acres 24 guntas in Sy.No. 55 claiming to be a tenant under the petitioner declaring him to be the owner of the land. The Land Tribunal granted occupancy rights in favour of second respondent. The same was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No. 2959/78 and by order dated 24.10.1993 this Court remanded the matter to the tribunal for fresh adjudication. After a fresh enquiry the tribunal again granted occupancy rights in favour of the second respondent by its order dated 14.11.1986. The said order was taken in appeal by the petitioner before the appellate authority which rejected the s...
State by Shahabad Rural Police Station Vs. Dyavappa and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)KarLJ502
1. We have heard the learned Government Pleader and the learned Counsel who represents the accused-respondents. Technically, the learned State Counsel may be right when he points out that the Trial Court was in error in having recorded an order of acquittal because the evidence of the complainant which is corroborated by the medical evidence would establish that he was the subject-matter of some assault at the hands of A1 and A2 but what stares us in the face is that the injuries were so minor that the State ought not to have ventured to file an appeal. The main reason for this is because these are very minor altercations that have taken place and unless the injuries are of some consequence, it would be difficult to categorise the order as being one which merits the High Court spending its time in re-examining the record and disposing off the appeal. ,2. Times without number, we have pointed out to the subordinate Courts before which these cases come up in the first instance that the h...
Mohamed Kasim Vs. First Addl. Sessions Judge and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1672
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Petitioner's vehicle bearing registration No. CAJ 2069 renumbered as CDL 1145 came to be confiscated as per an order dated 18.11.1983 passed by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Bangalore, on the ground that it was involved in certain forest offences under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963. The appeal preferred against this order in Appeal No. 55/84 came to be allowed as per order dated 10.9.1985 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Mandya and the matter was remanded to the original authority for passing orders afresh.2. The file relating to the seizure etc. having been transferred to the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Bangalore Division, Bangalore, as at that time there was certain administrative adjustments in the matter of territorial jurisdiction etc., it was considered by the Divisional Conservator of Forests, Bangalore Division, Bangalore, vide order dated 31/1/1986 and the vehicle was again confiscated. Petitioner preferred an appeal yet again...
Sri Somanath Kerebail Vs. the State of Karnataka, Through Deputy Commi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-12-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR527
ORDERTirath S. Thakur, J.1. This criminal revision petition is before us pursuant to a reference made by a learned Single Judge of this Court for an answer to the following question:'Whether grounds of belief that an offence has been committed or being committed is sufficient compliance with Section 54 of the Act or in addition to it the Seizing Authority also has to mention his reasons for not obtaining search warrant before conducting search and seizure.'The facts giving rise to the revision petition as also the present reference may in brief be set out first:2. A tanker bearing registration No. 19/1572 was seized by the Excise Inspector at Belgaum on 18.12.2000 while the same was transporting 10,000 liters of spirit without any permit or license to do so. Proceedings for the confiscation of the tanker were concluded by the authorized officer in terms of an order dated 30.6.2001 by which he directed confiscation of the vehicle in question. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »