Karnataka Court August 2003 Judgments
Shivalingamma Vs. T. Ramaiah and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-27-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant307; ILR2004KAR921
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The appeal is filed against the judgment and decree passed in R.A.NO. 39/1997 on the file of Pri . Civil Judge (Sr . Dn.) and C.J.M Mandya. The appellant is the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of mortgage loan of Rs. 20000/- with costs and interest from the defendant. The mortgage was executed by the husband of the defendant. The plaintiff contends that mortgage amount is not paid despite issuance of the notice. Hence filed the suit. The defendants in their written statement admits the mortgage and contends that subsequent to the issuance of notice, the mortgage amount has been repaid and original mortgage deed has been returned as a token of discharge. The defendant has produced the original mortgage deed in support of her contention.2. The Trial Court found that there is discrepancy in the evidence of defendant regarding the discharge of mortgage loan and obtaining the original mortgage as a token of discharge. Accordingly, disbelieved the theory of discha...
Tag this Judgment!K. Kamalanathan Vs. H.M.T. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR4030; 2004(1)KarLJ395; (2004)ILLJ936Kant
ORDERDattu, J. 1. Petitioner is an employee of the respondent - the Hindustan Machine Tools ('HMT' for short). At the relevant point of time, he was working as a Junior Accounts Officer. 2. The employees of the respondent - Company, have formed a cooperative society by name 'Hindustan Machine Tools (HMT) Watch Factory Cooperative Society Limited' ('the Society' for short). The said society is registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act. Apart from others, one of the objects of the Society is to promote the economic interest of its members in accordance with cooperative principles. Initially the society had nearly 2,500 members and now it appears, it has been reduced to 1,500 members. 3. Petitioner became a member of the society some time in the year 1980. In the elections held for the office of the Directors of the society some time in the year 1996, petitioner had contested and got himself elected as a Director of the society. It is stated in the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!B. Krishnamoorthy Beliya Vs. Syndicate Bank
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)KarLJ453; (2004)IILLJ75Kant
ORDERH.L. Dattu, J.1. Petitioner was working as Manager in the respondent-Syndicate Bank. While he was working in that capacity in Gundlupet Branch of the respondent-Bank, he was served with a charge memo dated 29-1-1999 containing charges of misconduct as Manager, Bannimantap Branch, Mysore, during the period 30-4-1994 to 28-5-1994. The allegation in the charge memo is as under:'Charge-sheet vide Regulation 6 of the Syndicate Bank Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976.Whereas, it is proposed to hold an enquiry against you under Regulation 6 of the Syndicate Bank Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976;AndWhereas, the Articles of Charges and Statement of Imputations of Misconduct in respect of which the enquiry is proposed to be held are mentioned here below.Now, therefore, you are hereby directed to submit your written statement of defence if any, within 15 days of receipt of this charge-sheet showing cause as to why Regular Departmental Pro...
Tag this Judgment!Sadashivaiah and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR5088
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 7540/2001 and 9155-9204/2001 and 26275-77/2001 are all owners of lands which are notified for acquisition by the Government for establishment of an industrial area for Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, the fourth respondent herein. Notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Area development Act was issued on 15.4.1997 and final notification was issued under Section 28(4} of the Act on 16.7.1997. Thereafter, the possession of the land was taken in pursuance of a notice issued under Section 28(6) on 17.7.1997. Notices under Section 9 and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter for short called as 'the Act') was issued after holding an enquiry for passing of an award. The compensation was mutually agreed to be paid at the rate of Rs. 6,00,000/- per acre for agricultural lands and Rs. 7,00,000/- per acre for converted land. Accordingly, compensation was paid to the petitioners. However, in so far as kharab land i...
Tag this Judgment!Hanumantha Gowda and anr. Vs. the Director of Mines and Geology and an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR343
ORDERShylendra Kumar, J. 1. Petitioners two in number have come up to this Court being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Senior Geologist the 2nd respondent herein rejecting the applications of the petitioners for grant of renewal of mining leases in their favour and which came to be affirmed by the 1st respondent, Director of Mines and Geology in the revision petitions filed before him under Rule 53(1) of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short 'the Rules').2. The undisputed facts are that the 1st petitioner had been granted mining lease for a period of 5 years as per lease deed dated 7.1.1997 in respect of 8 acres of land in Sy.No. 150 and 151 of Itagi village, Shirahatti Taluk in Dharwad District for quarrying ordinary sand on the Tunga Bhadra river bed. Likewise the 2nd petitioner also had been granted quarry lease for over an area of 10 acres in Tungabhadra riverbed adjacent to Sy.No. 151 of Itagi village Shirahatti Taluk, District for a period of 5 years fro...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjeeva Naika and anr. Vs. Shankara Narayana Naika (Since Deceased by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant103
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. This appeal is filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 18-8-98 in R. A. No. 23/88 on the tile of the II Addl. District Judge, Mangalore, D. K., arising out of the Judgment and Decree dated 15-6-88 in O. S. No. 259/81 on the file of the II Addl. Civil Judge, Mangalore.2. The appellants are the defendant Nos. 4 and 15 before the trial Court. The first respondent filed a suit for partition and possession in the suit schedule properties consisting of agricultural lands and moveable properties. One Thimmanna Naika and the deceased first defendant are the parents of plaintiff and defendants 2 to 7. Defendants 8 to 10 are the L.Rs. and children of deceased defendant No. 3 and defendants 11 to 14 are the L.Rs. and children of deceased defendant No. 5.3. During the lifetime of Thimmanna Naika, there is a partition amongst Thimmanna Naika and his sons, the suit properties were allotted to the share of Thimmanna Naika. After his demise, the plaintiff claims a share in th...
Tag this Judgment!E.M. Narasimhareddy and anr. Vs. Chikkanarasimha Reddy and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1487
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The appeal filed against the Judgment and decree passed in RA 29/1997 on the file of I Addl. District Judge, Kolar arising out of the Judgment and decree in O.S.No. 31/1990 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Chikkaballapur.2. The appellants are the plaintiffs, filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement for sale at Ex.P.1 dated 29.5.1988. The plaintiff's father and the father of defendants 4 and 5 and defendants 1 to 3 are full brothers. The suit property is the joint family property which consists of a non-residential plot with a Flour-Mill situate in Billapur Village of Bagepalli Taluk. Ex.P.1 came to be executed by defendants 1 to 3 in favour of plaintiffs father agreeing to sell for a total consideration of Rs. 76,000/- Including plaintiffs share, the value of the property was assessed at Rs. 95,000/-. The defendants 1 to 3 refused to execute the sale deed conveying their share in favour of the plaintiffs. Defendants 4 and 5 consented and execu...
Tag this Judgment!Lamps India Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: [2004]137STC468(Kar)
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioner in these petitions is seeking for various prayers. Petitioner is challenging clause (iv) of the Explanation II of the notification dated June 7, 1989 as repugnant to Indus- trial Policy G.O. No. CI 146 SPC 88 dated December 5, 1988.2. Petitioner, a partnership company, is a SSI unit and an ancillary to M/s. Mysore Lamps Works Ltd., Malleshwaram, Bangalore and is engaged in the manufacture and sale of HPMV burners and lamps, etc. Petitioner set up a manufacturing unit at Mulbagal during 1990 on the basis of the impugned Industrial Policy. A copy of the Government Order is filed at annexure A. Sales tax concession was implemented in terms of section 8-A of the Act. Notifications dated June 7, 1989 are filed at annexures B and C. Petitioner was issued with eligibility certificate by the Department of Industries in terms of annexure D. Assessment order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes for the year 1994-95. Petitioner understood...
Tag this Judgment!Fakirappa and ors. Vs. Mallappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)KarLJ154
A.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. This regular second appeal arises from the divergent findings of the Courts below.2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to in the course of this judgment by their rank and status in the Trial Court.3. The plaintiffs, respondents 1 to 5 filed O.S. No. 600 of 1990 against the defendants, appellants herein, seeking a decree of permanent injunction in respect of 8 acres of land in Sy. No. 12/1-AA of Karadikoppa Village, Hubli Taluk. The defendants resisted the suit and filed a counter-claim for partition of the said property and allotment of 1/3rd share to them on the ground that they had purchased 3 acres from Chennappa, the father of plaintiffs 3 to 5. After trial, the learned Trial Judge by his judgment and decree dated 16th December, 1993 decreed the suit as prayed for. Being aggrieved, the defendants took the matter in R.A. No. 8 of 1994 before the Court below. The Court below on reappreciation of the evidence set aside the judgment and dec...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Nisar Ahmed Vs. the Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Cor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-22-2003
Reported in: II(2004)ACC259; 2003ACJ1898; 2003(5)KarLJ186
S.R. Nayak, J.1. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and award dated 31-12-2001 passed in M.V.C. No. 1420 of 1994 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional Judge (SCCH-20), Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore (for short, 'the MACT) whereby it has awarded a sum of Rs. 15,36,460/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs thirty-six thousand four hundred and sixty) as compensation with costs and interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation.2. The Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation which is the owner of the BTS bus bearing Registration No. MEF 778 involved in the accident, being aggrieved by the above judgment and award has filed M.F.A. No. 359 of 2002 calling in question the validity of the award mainly on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the MACT is highly excessive and has sought for reducing the same. The claimant in M.V.C. No. 1420 of 1994 has also filed M.F.A. No. 817 of 2002 questioning the correctness o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »