Karnataka Court February 2003 Judgments
Ramaiah Vs. State of Karnataka by Secretary, Revenue Department and or ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant296; ILR2003KAR1385; 2004(2)KarLJ45
ORDERS. Further Held:That the Orders and Judgments of the Land Tribunal passedby virtue of the Karnataka Act, 26 of 1979, are valid Orders andany challenge to the Judgments/Orders can be only on merits inappeal and Revision proceedings. Such Orders passed by theTribunal are not invalid, since enactments i.e., Act 29 of 79 washeld unconstitutional and still born in Sri Kudli Shringeri MahaSamsthana v. State (ILR 1992 KAR 1877). (B) CONSTITUTION OF INDIA--ARTICLE 233--DOCTRINE OF DEFACTO COURT AND DOCTRINE OF DEFACTO JUDGE--Case Law discussed and Explained:When the Courts are established in exercise of Sovereign Powerof the State and as long as such Court have functioned anddischarged the duties assigned to it, the validity of decisionscannot be assailed in collateral proceedings, such as challengingthe validity of the Orders delivered by such Courts. Anysubsequent declaration that the Court or the Tribunal was notvalidly constituted could not affect the validity of such decisionor affec...
Tag this Judgment!Basappa Veerabhadrappa Hurakadli and ors. Vs. the Assistant Commission ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KarLJ409
ORDERS.R. Bannurmath, J.1. Though the matter is posted for admission with the consent of the learned Counsels on both sides, the same is taken up for final consideration.2. The petitioners have obtained a decree/award against the respondent in L.A.C. No. 42 of 1993 on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge, Dharwad, dated 31-1-1995. The same award came to be affirmed by this Court in M.F.A. No. 1885 of 1995. As per the award, the decree-holders were entitled to the compensation of Rs. 30,000/- per acre with 30% solatium as well as additional market value at the rate of 12% per annum as per the provisions of Section 23(1-A) read with Section 30 of the amended Act from the date of notification under Section 4(1) till the date of award or till the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier. The award also further made it clear that the decree-holders are entitled to the interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation.3. The petitioners sought to ...
Tag this Judgment!Raghunath Raghavendra Rao Jahagirdar Vs. Srinivas Rao Raghavendra Rao ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)KarLJ48
S.R. Nayak, J.1. This regular first appeal is preferred by the defendant in the suit and directed against the judgment and decree dated 20th October, 1997 passed in Original Suit No. 27 of 1993 on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gadag.2. The respondents herein are the plaintiffs. They filed the above suit for partition of the suit schedule property by metes and bounds and for mesne profits.3. The case of the plaintiffs in brief is as follows:The father of the plaintiffs and the defendant had three sons and five daughters as reflected in the genealogy produced at Appendix A. The father of the plaintiffs and defendant expired on 16-12-1953 at the native place called Holealur Village. Before his demise, the father had performed the marriage of all his daughters except the youngest one by name Kumuda. The plaintiffs and the defendant together performed the marriage of Kumuda. At the time of the death of the father, the plaintiffs were minors and the defendant wa...
Tag this Judgment!Sudarshan Kumar Babu Vallurur Vs. Visveswaraiah Technological Universi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR4771; 2003(4)KarLJ252
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. In a student's career, how a pass, without a class and pass in the first attempt in the prescribed examination, can change his course of life is the subject-matter of this wirt petition. Facts in brief:The petitioner was admitted to first semester M.Tech. course in Computer Applications in Industrial Drives during the academic year 1999-2000 as against a free merit seat. The petitioner attended the classes regularly and was doing well in sessional tests. In the first semester, out of the total internal assessment marks carrying a maximum of 300, the petitioner secured 221 marks. The petitioner suffered serious attack of enteric fever from 23rd February, 2000 because of which he had to be shifted to Gudivada, his native place. He was advised complete rest up to 15th March, 2000. On account of the said ill-health, the petitioner could not attend the first semester examination conducted in March 2000. Therefore, in October-November 2000, the petitioner took first and s...
Tag this Judgment!Hanumanthaiah and ors. Vs. the Land Tribunal and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1410; 2003(3)KarLJ482
Jain, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 16.9.1998 passed in W.P.No. 14513/1992, wherein the learned Single Judge has allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the order dated 5.4.1988 passed by the Land Tribunal, Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore, in LRF. No. 1027/74-75, granting occupancy rights in respect of 23 guntas of land in favour of Hanumanthaiah, whose L.Rs. were impleaded as Respondents 2(a) to 2(c) in the Writ Petition. 2. The brief necessary facts as stated are, that certain service inam lands in Sy.No. 19/1, mensuring 3 acres 01 guntas, Sy.No. 34, mensuring 29 guntas and Sy.No. 19/4, mensuring 1 acre 5 guntas and Sy.No. 19/3, mensuring 1 acre 26 guntas of T. Dasarahalli Village, Yeshwanthapura hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, were attached to the Shanbhogi Office of T. Dasarahalli Village. The said lands were auctioned by the Tahsildar under Panchasalgutta and the rents were collected, which were deposited in the treasury for the benefit of the holder of th...
Tag this Judgment!Gangadharappa Vs. Smt. Kanthamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1742
ORDERSreedhar Rao, J.1. The revision filed against the impugned order of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Shidlagatta in Execution No. 54/2001.2. The respondent in this petition is the decree holder obtaining a decree for permanent injunction against the petitioner in O.S.No. 256/97 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) Shidlagatta. The said decree is under execution. Inter-alia in the execution, an application under Section 151 CPC was filed seeking Police help to protect the possession of the decree holder. The Executing Court granted the request. Being aggrieved, the present revision is filed.3. The Counsel for the petitioner submits that an appeal is filed in R.A.No. 76/2000 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Chintamani against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No. 256/97. There is an application for condonation of delay and also for staying execution of the judgment and decree of the Trial Court. During the pendency of the appeal, it is said that the decree is executed and impugn...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwari Varma Vs. University of Mysore and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KarLJ373
1. The writ petitioner in W.P. No. 21258 of 1991 being unsuccessful in getting the relief at the hands of learned Single Judge has preferred this writ appeal calling in question correctness of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 15-6-1999.2. In the writ petition, the appellant herein sought for mandamus directing the respondent-University to extend pay scale of Rs. 3700-5700 on the ground that University cannot discriminate between the Readers who have been promoted on regular basis and the Readers promoted under a special scheme called 'merit promotion scheme' to which class the petitioner belongs. Learned Single Judge having opined that the lecturers who came to be promoted to the cadre of Readers in the University, in regular channel of promotional avenue and the petitioner and others who have been promoted under the 'merit promotion scheme' could not be regarded as the persons belonging to the same class in order to attract the postulates of Article 14 of the Constitution o...
Tag this Judgment!P.J. Surendranath Vs. S.P. Pandurangan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2965
ORDERShylendra Kumar, J.1. This Revision Petition filed by the respondent tenant in HRC No. 10091/2002 on the file of the Court of XV Addl. Small Causes, Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore is directed against the order dated 23.10.2002 whereby the Court below has allowed the petition that had been filed by the landlord under Section 27(2)(r) and Section 31(c) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 (for short 'the Act') and has directed the respondent tenant to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the premises within 60 days from the date of the order. It is aggrieved by this order respondent tenant in the eviction petition is in revision before this Court.2. When the matter had come up for admission before this Court this Court by order dated 27.12.2002 ordered issue of emergent notice and had stayed the impugned order for a period of eight weeks.Subsequently learned Counsel for the petitioner had moved the case for further orders in view of the fact that stay order expires.3. This Revisio...
Tag this Judgment!Marishetty Vs. Land Tribunal and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)KarLJ600
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 30-9-1981 in case Nos. LRF 56, 55/74-75 passed by the Land Tribunal, Nanjangud, insofar as 1 acre 6 guntas in Sy. No. 228/3 of Byalaru Village, Nanjangud Taluq has filed this writ petition.2. The case of the petitioner is that, the land in Sy. No. 228/3 of Byalaru Village in Nanjangud Tq., measuring 2 acres 12 guntas excluding 2 guntas of kharab originally-belonged to Shettaiah, the father of the petitioner. The said land is the ancestral property. After the demise of the petitioner's father, the petitioner and his brother Madashetty succeeded to the said property. His brother Madashetty was dumb and was unmarried, continued to live with the petitioner till his death. The kathastood in the name of Madashetty, after the demise of their father. The petitioner's brother Madashetty mortgaged the said land in favour of Chikkamma w/o. Rangashetty in the year 1932. Subsequently, simple mortgage was cre...
Tag this Judgment!B.S. Chandrappa (Since Deceased) by Widow Anusuya and ors. Vs. Shobha ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: 2003ACJ1770
A.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. These petitions and appeals are preferred by the owner of Tempo bearing registration No. MEZ 9797 which was involved in the accident, being aggrieved by the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated 27.8.2001, passed in M.V.C. No. 1257 of 1988 and connected cases on the file of the Addl. M.A.C.T., Udupi apportioning the liability between Tempo and the bus bearing registration No. CTX 9373 in proportion of 25:75. As the only question involved in these petitions and the appeals is the correctness or otherwise of the apportionment of liability in the above stated ratio, these petitions and the appeals are taken together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. There is no appeal by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation, nor is there any appeal by the insurance company questioning its liability vis-a-vis the bus involved in the accident which, admittedly, is insured by it. All these petitions and appeals have been filed by the owner of Tempo calling ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »