Karnataka Court August 2003 Judgments
Mallappa Vs. Srinivasa Rao (Dead) by L.Rs
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant31; 2003(5)KarLJ517
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. This appeal along with the cross-objections are filed against the judgment and decree dated 9-7-1997 in R.A. No. 48 of 1989 on the file of the District Judge, Gulbarga arising out of the judgment and decree dated 8-10-1982 in O.S. No. 49 of 1978 on the file of the Civil Judge, Gulbarga.2. The appellant is the plaintiff in the suit. The respondents filed a suit for specific performance of the contract to execute a registered sale deed in respect of the suit schedule land, in respect of which a written agreement for sale was executed on 31-8-1975. Under the terms of agreement, the plaintiff had paid the full consideration amount of Rs. 31,001/- towards the sale value, the plaintiff was put in possession. The defendants undertook to execute the sale deed as and when called upon. Based on the agreement of sale, Ex. P. 14, the plaintiff made an application for mutation in his name in the revenue records. The Tahsildar by his order dated 22-12-1977 directed mutation in ...
Tag this Judgment!Jugraj Sethia Vs. M. Ramaiah (Deceased) by L.Rs and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)KarLJ394
ORDERK. Bhakthavatsala, J.1. This is plaintiffs revision petition filed under Section 18 of the Small Causes Court Act directed against the judgment and decree dated 22-1-2000 passed in S.C. No. 5047 of 1998 on the file of the III Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, dismissing the suit as barred by limitation.2. When the case had come up for admission, the learned Single Judge of this Court admitted the case and issued notice to the respondents. Notice on respondent 2/defendant 2 was served, but he remained unrepresented. Three times notices were sent to respondent I/defendant 1, but they were returned with a postal shara that 'there was no such person in the address'.3. Subsequently, when the notice was issued to respondent 1 by way of substituted service viz., by affixture, the same was returned with a shara 'that the respondent 1-Head Constable with P.C. Buckle No. 1595 expired on 23-5-1999'. Thereafter on 3-9-2001, when the case was listed for orders regarding steps...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bhimavva and ors. Vs. Shankar @ Adya and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2003ACJ1829; AIR2004Kant58; ILR2003KAR3538; 2004(2)KarLJ166
ORDER ON REFERENCE Question for determination: What is the extent of liability of the Insurance Company to indemnify the owner under Act policy against the compensation awarded by MACT under the Motor Vehicles Act, in a claim by a injured workmen or legal representatives of deceased workman, who has opted to file claim petition before the Tribunal under the Act. Whether such liability of insurance company to indemnify the owner is unlimited or limited to the extent of liability under W.C. Act 1923. Per CJ, V.G. Sabhahit and Mohan Shantanagoudar JJ Over ruling both the Minority and Majority view in Noorulla's case (ILR 1999 KAR 2725) held that Insurance Company is liable to satisfy. The award passed by the Tribunal without determination in terms of WC Act in respect of employee covered under the Act policy and liability is limited as per the provisions of WC Act.As per CJ, VG. Sabhahit, and Mohan Shantanagoudar, JJ It is well settled that the liability of the Insurer for payment of Comp...
Tag this Judgment!Jugraj Sethia Vs. M. Ramaiah and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR3739
Bhakthavatsala, J. 1. This is plaintiff revision petition filed under Section 18 of the Small Causes Court Act directed against the judgment and decree dated 22-1-2000 passed in S.C.No. 5047 of 1998 on the file of the III Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, dismissing the suit as barred by limitation. 2. When the case had come up for admission, the learned Single Judge of this Court admitted the case and issued notice to the respondents. Notice on respondent No. 2 / Defendant No. 2 was served but he remained unrepresented. Three times notices were sent to Respondent No. 1/Defendant No. 1 but they were returned with a postal shara that "there was no such person in the address". 3. Subsequently, when the notice was issued to respondent No. 1 by way of substituted service viz., by affixture, the same was returned with a shara "that the respondent No. 1 / Head Constable with P.C. Buckle No. 1595 expired on 23.5.1999". Thereafter on 3-9-2001, when the case was listed for ord...
Tag this Judgment!Vidyavardhaka Sangha Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)KarLJ493
ORDERH. Rangavittalachar, J.1. Since in all these writ petitions the challenge is made to the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Classification, Regulation and Prescription of Curricula, etc.) Rules, 1995 ('Rules' for brevity), all these petitions are disposed of by this common order.2. W.P. Nos. 1889 to 1892 of 1999 is filed by the Associated Management of (Government Recognised Unaided English Medium) Primary and Secondary Schools in Karnataka and three other educational institutions while W.P. No. 1302 of 2000 is filed by Vidyavardhaka Sangha, another educational institution.3. The petitioners contend that they have established educational institutions including pre-primary courses comprising of 'kindergartens', 'play homes' and 'nurseries' or 'caring centres' for tender children primarily meant to guide and organise the natural playing tendency of children and also to facilitate working couples who cannot take care of the young ones at their homes and admit these children in the k...
Tag this Judgment!Vidyavardhaka Sangha, by Its Honorary Secretary Vs. State of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR4043
ORDERRangavittalachar, J. 1. Since in all these Writ Petitions the challenge is made to the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Classifications, Regulation and Prescription of Curricula, Etc.) Rules, 1995 ('Rules' for brevity), all these petitions are disposed of by this common order. 2. WP 1889-92/1999 is filed by the Associated Management of(Government Recognised Unaided English Medium) Primary and Secondary Schools in Karnataka and three other educational institutions while WP 1302/2000 is filed by Vidya Vardhaka Sangha, another educational institution. 3. The Petitioners contend that they have established educational institutions including pre-primary courses comprising of 'kindergartens' , 'play homes' and 'nurseries' or 'caring centres' for tender children primarily meant to guide and organise the natural playing tendency of children and also to facilitate working couple who cannot take care of the young ones at their homes and admit these children in the kindergartens for what i...
Tag this Judgment!M.S. Saini Vs. the Secretary, Department of Home and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ553; ILR2004KAR143
ORDERShylendra Kumar, J. 1. Petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents, Secretary, Department of Home, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore and the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore City and his subordinates in not acting in terms of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code in not registering the information which had been furnished by the petitioner on 10th July, 2001 containing allegation against one H. Jayanna, Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Yeshwanthpur Police Station indicating that he had indulged in the act of intimidation, harassment, fraudulent extortion, cheating, demanding bribe from the petitioner and even blackmailing which are all cognizable offences and notwithstanding the petitioner furnishing such information not only to the 5th respondent Inspector of Police but also to the superior officer including the Commissioner of police no action has been taken, that the information was not even registered as is required t...
Tag this Judgment!Bhimavva and ors. Vs. Shankar Alias Adya and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: (2004)IILLJ235Kant
ORDERN.K. Jain, C.J (for himself and V.G. Sabhahit and Mohan Shanthanagoudar, J.J.)1. In view of the Order dated 29.7.2003, passed by the Chief Justice, this reference is placed before us on 6.8.2003. The Division Bench vide order dated 7.7.2003 had referred these matters to the Full Bench considering the law declared in Noorulla v. P.K. Prabhakar and Anr., : AIR2000Kant1 (FB) is no longer good law in the light of the pronouncements of the Supreme Court. The Full Bench of this Court, on consideration that Full Bench cannot sit in judgment on the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench has made this reference to a Five Judges Bench vide order dated 29.7.2003 in M.F.A. No. 2124 of 1993 connected with M.F.A. Nos. 3586, 3808 and 4340 of 1997; M.F.A. Nos. 3797 of 1994 and 1800 of 1998. The question that arises for determination before this Bench is the extent of liability of Insurance Company to indemnify the owner under the Act Policy against the compensation awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Trib...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Reena Janardhana Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)KarLJ493
S.R. Nayak, J.1. This appeal filed under Section 38 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (for short, the 'Act'), is directed against the judgment dated 17-4-2003 passed in E.P. No. 37 of 2001 on the file of the VI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City (CCH 11), Bangalore (for short, the 'Trial Court'). By the impugned judgment, the Trial Court has allowed the petition filed by Smt. Nagarathna, 4th respondent herein, under Section 33 of the Act declaring that the declaration of the appellant herein as elected from ward No. 73 as Councillor of the bangalore Mananagara Pahke (BMP) on 12-11-2001 and published in the Official Gazette on 17-11-2001 as null and void and setting aside the same.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:The Karnataka State Government notified the elections to 100 Wards within the limits of BMP for electing Corporators. The election was held on 11-11-2001, votes were counted on 12-11-2001 and the results were declared on the same day. ...
Tag this Judgment!H. Ramakrishna Vs. Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-13-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)KarLJ386
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. The 3rd respondent in this writ petition is a person holding authorisation to distribute essential food items and other items under the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992 (for short, 'the Order'), for card-holders in Neerakallu Village, Madhugiri Taluk, Tumkur District.2. The manner of distribution of food items by this authorised distributor was subject-matter of an enquiry before the 1st respondent-Deputy Commissioner particularly in the contest of complaints that the 3rd respondent had not supplied rice to 447 students of Government Higher Primary School, Neerakallu during the year 2001 and likewise had not supplied food items to 67 students of the Government Higher Primary School, Gollrahalli and also that the 3rd respondent has not distributed rice to 135 students of Government Higher Primary School, Chinnenahalli and so on. An enquiry was held by the Deputy Commissioner through the Tahsildar and based o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »