Karnataka Court February 2003 Judgments
Dooja Kotian Vs. State of Karnataka, Rep. by Secretary, Department of ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1769
ORDERPatil, J.1. The petitioner assailing the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 28.3.1981 passed by the Land Tribunal in so far as it relates to grant of occupancy rights in favour of the 3rd respondent in respect of land in Sy. No. 17/108 measuring 0.85 acres of Kallamudkur village of Karkala Taluk O.K.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, his father has purchased the land in question under a registered sale deed dated 15.9.1961 from its original vendor. In pursuance of the said sale deed, his father's name was entered in the RTC for the agricultural years 1968-69 to 1979-80. Be that as it may. The 3rd respondent - late Smt. Loku Hengsu had filed Form No. 7 for grant of occupancy rights in respect of the land in question on 9.8.1974 and the same was registered. The Land Tribunal after hearing the parties and considering both oral and documentary evidence has granted occupancy rights in respect of the land in question along with other several items in favour of th...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka, Rep. by Its Secretary, Revenue Department and ors. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2064
Saldanha, J. 1. We have heard the learned Government Advocate and the respondent's learned Advocate on merits. Learned Government Advocate vehemently submitted that the learned Single Judge has totally overlooked some of the salient aspects of the cases namely that this was an instance where the respondent who is the original petitioner was doing the poultry farming activity on a very large scale because according to the learned Government Advocate from the record it emerges that several buildings were constructed including the staff quarters and the like. His submission is that everything pointed out by the learned Single Judge and the references to the law which are made by respondents learned Advocate Mr. Shastry would hold good in the case of small farmers who rear poultry on a small scale in little farms and that in the present instance the land which is over 13 Acres was virtually converted into a large scale poultry farm. He submits that it is for the last of these reasons that ...
Tag this Judgment!N.K. Nanjarajaiah and anr. Vs. Karnataka Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant253; 2003(5)KarLJ337
S.R. Nayak, J.1. Writ Appeal No. 4258-59 of 1999 are directed against the common order of the learned single Judge dated 17-2-1999 in writ petition No. 39752 of 1995 and 39753 of 1995. The appellants herein are the petitioners in those writ petitions. When the Karnataka Electricity Board (for short the 'Board'), on the ground that the writ petitioners therein, despite having their own houses near the place where they were officiating did not vacate the official quarters and move to their own residential houses sought to recover the penal rent in terms of the Regulations framed by the Board under Section 79(c) of the Karnataka Electricity supply Act (for short the 'Supply Act'). At that stage, the appellants filed writ petition in this court assailing the validity of the Notification dated 24-4-1989 produced at Annexure-B amending the rules called 'Karnataka Electricity Board Accounts Manual Volume-1 (Amendment) Regulations 1988' and for consequential reliefs. A learned single Judge who...
Tag this Judgment!C. Sesha Reddy Vs. T. Basavana Goud
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant335; I(2004)BC19; ILR2003KAR5067; 2003(6)KarLJ409
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. This second appeal arises out of the Judgment and Decree passed by the Civil Judge at Bellary in O.S. No. 4/1990 and set aside by the District Judge at Bellary in R.A. No. 10/1992 by an order of remand. The appellant is the defendant, The respondent is the plaintiff filed a suit in O.S. No. 4/90 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 56,000/- with costs and interest on the strength of a pronote executed by the defendant. It was the contention of the plaintiff that for meeting domestic expenses a loan of Rs. 56,000/- was borrowed on 12-12-1986 and a pronote to that effect was executed with an undertaking to repay the same with interest at 24% p.m.2. The defendant in the written statement stoutly denied the execution of the pronote and passing of the consideration. It is said that defendant is the close friend of the plaintiff and he used to assist the plaintiff in a shop as a courtesy and that signatures of the defendant were taken by the plaintiff under some false pretext o...
Tag this Judgment!Budavanat Subraya Palekar Vs. Babu Vajra Chandavarkar and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant105; ILR2004KAR4068
K. Sreedhar Rao, J. 1. The Counsel for the appellant submits that the first respondent died on 11-11-2002 and the respondents 2 and 3 are his sons and they are already on record and they sufficiently represent the estate of the first respondent. Therefore, no need to bring on record any other L. Rs. 2. The second appeal arises out of the Judgment and decree passed by the Principal Munsiff, Sirsi in OS No. 255/89 and confirmed in appeal by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sirsi in RA' no. 8/95. The appellant is the unsuccessful plaintiff filed a suit for a declaration that the sale deed obtained by the defendant/respondent dated 28-5-1959 is illegal and outcome of fraud. The plaintiff contends that the suit schedule landed property absolutely belongs to him and he was in Government service. On account of his frequent transfer from place to place the defendant was made to stay in the suit property since 1956 and allowed him to manage the property as he was his sister's husband. The reve...
Tag this Judgment!M. Sripathi Sampigethaya Vs. P. Seetharam Bhat and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1500; 2003(4)KarLJ98
ORDERRangavittalachar, J. 1. Petitioner has challenged the order of the Commissioner for Religious and Charitable Endowments on the ground of maintainability of appeal in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Facts of the case: The writ petitioners' father Sri Harishchandra Sampigethaya was appointed as a hereditary trustee of the temple 'Ballamanja Sri Anantheshwara Temple' situate at Belthangady Taluk, D.K. District, in the year 1955. Harishchandra Sampigethaya died in the year 1970. Since the Temple was governed by the provisions of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for brevity), proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the said Act for appointing the next hereditary trustee and by an order dated 4.8.1970, the Deputy Commissioner appointed the petitioner as the 'hereditary trustee' vide Annexure D. While the petitioner was so functioning the 1st respondent to this Writ Petition also ma...
Tag this Judgment!Gowramma Vs. Munivenkatamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-19-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)KarLJ541
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This revision petition under Section 46(1) of the Karnataka Rent Act is directed against the order dated 3-1-2002 passed in Miscellaneous Petition No. 157 of 1998 on the file of the II Additional Small Causes Judge, Bangalore. The Trial Court having allowed the miscellaneous petition which had been filed under the provisions of Order 9, Rule 13 of the CPC and having set aside the earlier order of eviction that had been passed in H.R.C. No. 2032 of 1992, dated 6-1-1994, the aggrieved respondent in the miscellaneous case who was the petitioner in the HRC and in whose favour the eviction order had been passed is before this Court.2. H.R.C. No. 2032 of 1992 had been filed before the Court below praying for an order of eviction as against the respondent in this revision petition on the grounds of bona fide use and occupation of the landlady.3. The respondent having been set ex parte, the petition came to be allowed on 6-1-1994 and an eviction order had been p...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Dal Mill and ors. Vs. the Government of Karnataka, by Its Secr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1622
Nayak, J.1. The appellants in these writ appeals are the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 23578 to 23617 of 1999. The Appellants feeling aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 7.12.1999 in W.P.Nos. 23578 to 23617 of 1999 dismissing the Writ Petitions, have preferred these Writ Appeals.2. The background facts leading to the filing of the Writ Petitions be noted briefly in the first instance and they are as follows:-3. The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'), the second respondent herein, formed an industrial layout at Tarihal village in the year 1983, pursuant to which, it invited applications from intending purchasers for allotment of industrial sites. In response to the same, the petitioners-Appellants who were desirous of owning industrial sites and putting up their respective industries, applied for the allotment of the sites. It is seen that the petitioners-Appellants applied for the allotment of the sites at diffe...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. M.V. Lalithamani and ors. Vs. Mysore Urban Development Authority, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1695; 2003(4)KarLJ528
ORDERRangavittalachar, J. 1. Petitioners have challenged in these petitions the acquisition proceedings initiated by the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA for short) in respect of several items of agricultural lands situate at Nachanahalli Village, Mysore Taluk more particularly described in the schedule to the Writ Petition in this proceedings. Briefly stated the facts are:Petition scheduled properties which are several items of agricultural lands are owned by the writ petitioners. These properties, among several other properties belonging to various other persons, were notified for acquisition under Section 17 of the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 ('Act' for short) by a gazette notification dated 30.1.1992 and by a final notification issued under Section 19(1) dated 9.3.1998 for purposes of development of Mysore City Nachanahalli III Stage. These two notifications are challenged in these Writ Petitions.2. The main grounds of challenge are: Firstly, that the ...
Tag this Judgment!The Marimallappa Education Trust Vs. Smt. K.S. Rathnamma and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)KarLJ229
ORDERH. Rangavittalachar, J.1. The petitioner-Marimallappa Educational Trust in this writ petition, has challenged the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Commissioner of Collegiate Education in Appeal No. 11 of 2002. 2. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are as under:The petitioner-Trust has been running Educational Institution in Mysore City from primary to collegiate education. The first respondent herein is the employee working as a Principal of Mallamma Marimallappa Women's Art and Commerce College, Mysore. On the ground that the first respondent committed certain financial irregularities during the period when she was on leave, disciplinary enquiry was instituted and pending enquiry, by the order dated 26-8-2001 she was kept under suspension by the petitioner-institution. 3. The first respondent-employee challenged the said order of suspension by filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Collegiate Education. The Appellate Authority allowed th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »