Karnataka Court July 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.
Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. A.K. Abdul Samad and Ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-11-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4149; 2003(6)KarLJ208; (2004)ILLJ643Kant
ORDERRajendra Prasad, J.1. Both these revision petitions involve common questions of facts and law. Parties are common in both the cases and common arguments have been advanced by the learned Counsel for revision petitioner. Hence, both the cases are being disposed of by the following common order.2. Both these criminal revision petitions filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr. P.C. by the revision petitioner are directed against the orders dated 27-8-2002 in C.C. Nos. 1280 and 1281 of 1999 on the file of the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bangalore, wherein the learned Judge had recorded a finding of conviction so far as A-1 is concerned and had sentenced him to undergo imprisonment till the raising of the Court and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days for each of the offences under Section 85(i)(a) of the ESI Act ('the Act', for short), particularly questioning the quantum of sentence imposed on the accused.3....
P. Shekar Vs. K.S. Muralidhar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4258; ILR2003KAR3505
ORDERBhakthavatsala, J.1. This Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401of Cr P.C. is directed against the order dated 20-12-1999 passed inC.C. No. 2195/1995 on the file of the I Additional C.M.M, BangaloreCity discharging the accused for the offences under Section 448and 427 of IPC on the ground that trial did not commence thoughthe case is pending for more than two years, on the basis of thejudgment of Apex Court rendered in 'COMMON CAUSE v. UNION OF INDIA, ILR 1996 KAR 2063' . 2. The respondent is represented by Sri M.T. Nanaiah, Sri H.S. Chandramouli, learned S.P.P. assisted the Court.3. Heard arguments.4. The petitioner is referred to as 'the complainant' and the respondent as 'the accused' as arrayed in the Trial Court.5. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the Revision petition may be stated as under:The complainant filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr. P.C. against the accused, in PCR No. 19/1995 on the file of I Additional C.M.M., Ba...
Shantesh Gureddi Vs. State of Karnataka, by Its Secretary, Department ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR3862; 2003(6)KarLJ149
ORDERRangavittalachar, J.1. Though the matter is listed for Orders, with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is finally disposed of. 2. The petitioner purchased the property bearing Municipal No.516/4, 10th Cross, Rajmahal Vilas, Bangalore, under a sale deed dated 31-8-2000 and presented it for registration: The Sub-Registrar, Gandhinagar, suspecting that the property was under valued to evade stamp duty referred the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, under Section 45-A(1) of the Stamp Act (here-in-after referred to as an 'Act' for brevity) for determination of market value and for payment of proper stamp duty thereon. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, after notice and enquiry, by his order dated 29-12-2000 vide Annexure-C determined the market value of the property at Rs.72,35,366/- and called upon the petitioner to pay or deposit Rs. 7,01,220/- being the difference of the amount of the stamp duty. Accordingly, the petitioner paid the said sum on 3-1-200...
Harkhu Bai and ors. Vs. Jiyaram and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ1332
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. These two appeals arise out of an order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raichur, whereby M.V.C. Nos. 3 and 24 of 1990 filed for payment of compensation by the appellants have been dismissed.2. The deceased Vegataram Tulcharam Jatt was a driver by profession. He was on 17.6.1989 driving a lorry on the National Highway No. 13. When he reached a place near Kushtagi, another lorry coming from the opposite direction had a head-on collision with the lorry being driven by the deceased causing extensive damage to his lorry and severe bodily injuries to the deceased to which he succumbed. M.V.C. No. 3 of 1990 was filed by the owner of the lorry for payment of compensation for the damage caused to his vehicle whereas M.V.C. No. 24 of 1990 was filed by the widow of the deceased Vegataram Tulcharam Jatt, his parents and minor son for payment of compensation. The case of the claimants in both the claim petitions was that the accident in question had taken place...
M.T. Srikantaiah Vs. Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-09-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR3729
ORDERPatil, J. 1. The petitioner, assailing the legality and validity of the impugned public auction notice dated 15th November 2002 issued by the third respondent vide Annexure G, has presented this Writ Petition. He has further sought for a direction, directing the third respondent not to auction the house property of the petitioner situate at 1st Ward, Kote Road, Doddaballapur measuring an area of 48X46. 2. The facts of the case are that Petitioner is a businessman by profession running power looms. To improve his business and working capital, he has availed a loan for a sum of Rs. 03 lakhs from the second respondent - Bank and the petitioner has secured the said loan by hypothecating his eight power looms. The Petitioner could not keep up the payment of instalments regularly due to loss in the business and financial constraints. The second respondent -Bank has raised a dispute and referred the matter to the first respondent and the first respondent acting as an Arbitrator passed th...
Sangappa Veerappa Katarki Vs. Bhimappa Yamanappa Chabbi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant462; 2004(1)CTLJ140(Kar); ILR2003KAR3259; 2003(6)KarLJ213
Bhakthavatsala, J.1. This is Plaintiff's Regular Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging the judgment and decree dated 25.6.1999 passed in R.A. No. 44/98 on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge (Sr Dvn), Bangalkot, allowing the Appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 6.3.1998 passed in O.S No 46/96 on the file of the Principle Civil Judge (Jr Dvn), Bagalkot.2. The Respondent has entered appearance through his Advocate, Sri Jeevan Neerlagi.3. For the purpose of convenience and better understanding, the Appellant and the Respondent herein are referred to as 'the Plaintiff' and 'the Defendant' as arrayed in the Original Suit.4. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the Appeal may be stated as under:-The Plaintiff filed a Suit against the Defendant praying for a decree, directing the Defendant to repay the earnest amount with interest at the rate of 24% per annum, which he had paid to the Defendant, under an agreem...
Smt. Savithri @ Savithramma @ Vijayalakshmi and ors. Vs. Ramappa and a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2003
Reported in: III(2004)ACC544; ILR2003KAR3968
Tirath S Thakur, J. 1. Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hubli has allowed MVC No. 118 of 1996 in part and awarded a sum of Rs. 2,52,633/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum towards compensation for the death of late Sri Parvatgouda Patil in a motor accident. The claimants-appellants have appealed to this Court for a suitable enhancement of the said amount. 2. The deceased Parvatgounda Patil was working as police constable attached to the office of the Commissioner of Police Hubli at Dharwad. He was, on the fateful day, returning to his village from Hubli on a two wheeler when a truck coming from the opposite direction knocked him down resulting in his death two days later in the hospital to which he was removed for treatment. In due course, the appellants filed MVC NO. 118/1996 for payment of compensation and prayed for an amount of Rs. 12,00,000/- with interest at 18% per annum. 3. The claim was opposed by the Respondent-giving rise to three issues, which the Tribunal...
Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Thippeswamy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-07-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ805; ILR2003KAR3485; 2003(5)KarLJ110
K.L. Manjunath, J.1. These two appeals are arising out of a common order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Chitradurga, Respondent 1 in these two appeals are the claimants before the Commissioner. According to them, they were working as loaders and un-loaders in the tractor of respondent 2 on 27-2-2000 and that they have sustained certain injuries in a road traffic accident. According to them, immediately after the accident they were taken to Primary Health Centre, Hiriyur. Thereafter, they were shifted to District Hospital, Chitradurga for better treatment. It is contended by the claimants that they were transporting size stones in order to construct farmhouse of their employer, who is the owner of the tractor-trailer. Appellant/insurance company resisted the claim petition. Commissioner after recording the evidence of the claimants and also Dr. Shivanna Reddy who has issued the disability certificate in favour of the claimants held that the accident occurred duri...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Thippeswamy and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-07-2003
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC554
K.L. Manjunath, J.1. These two appeals are arising out of a common order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Chitradurga. R-1 in these two appeals are the claimants before the Commissioner. According to them, they were working as loaders and unloaders in the tractor of R-2 on 27.2.2000 and that they have sustained certain injuries in a road traffic accident. According to them, immediately after the accident they were taken to PHC, Hiriyur. Thereafter, they were shifted to District Hospital, Chitradurga for better treatment. It is contended by the claimants that they were transporting size stones in order to construct farmhouse of their employer who is the owner of the tractor and trailer. Appellant Insurance Company resisted the claim petition. Commissioner after recording the evidence of the claimants and also Dr. Shivanna Reddy who has issued the disability certificate in favour of claimants held that the accident occurred during the course of employment and furthe...
Smt. Sujaya Ramappa Vs. the Assistant Commissioner and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-04-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2894
ORDERChandrashekaraiah, J.1. The petitioner is the Adhyaksha of the 2nd respondent Taluk Panchayat 1/3rd of the total number of members of the Taluk Panchayat gave a notice to the Adhyaksha expressing their intention to move the motion of no confidence as against the petitioner. This notice was received in the office of the Adhyaksha on 31.3.2003, as seen from the records produced by the learned Government Pleader. On the very same day, it appears, the said notice was brought to the notice of the petitioner. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner has not taken any steps to call for the special meeting to consider the motion of no confidence. But the Executive Officer of the 2nd respondent by his notice dated 8.4.2003, called for the meeting of the Taluk Panchayat fixing the date of meeting as 16.4.2003. On 16.4.2003, the motion was passed by majority. This decision of the Taluk Panchayat on the motion of no confidence moved against the petitioner has been questioned by the petit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »