Karnataka Court February 2004 Judgments
The Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Fakirappa Mugubasappa and ors ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-23-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR2371
S. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in all these appeals, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, they are heard and disposed of by this Common Judgment.2. These appeals and cross-objections are filed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Malaprabha Project, Saundatti and the claimants respectively being aggrieved by the common judgment and award passed in LAG No.345/2000 and connected matters dated 22.11.2001.3. The appellant has acquired the lands in question situated in Budihal Village, Bailhongal Taluk, for a public purpose, for the submergence of Malaprabha Project. Preliminary Notification was issued on 31.7.1997 followed by a Final Notification dated 17.9.1998. The Appellant has passed an award on 15.4.2000. Possession of the lands was already taken on 29.8.1985.4. The Land Acquisition Officer has awarded a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- per acre for the acquired lands. Being dissatisfed with the award, the claimants filed ...
Tag this Judgment!Anneppa Channappa Shetkar and anr., Etc. Vs. Bandevva (Deceased by L. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-23-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Kant276
K.L. Manjunath, J.1. Appellants in these appeals were the plaintiffs before the trial Court. Appellants in R. S. A. 216/1999 were the plaintiffs in O. S. No. 74/78 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Bidar and they were also the appellants before the Addl. Dist. Judge, Bidar in R. A. 24/87. Appellant in RSA 215/99 was the plaintiff in O. S. No. 73/78 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Bidar and appellant in R. A. 23/87. Appellants in RSA 214/99 were the plaintiffs in O. S. No. 72/78 oh the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Bidar and appellants before the Addl. District Judge, Bidar in R.A. 22/87. Appellants in RSA 213/99 were the plaintiffs in O. S. No. 69/78 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Bidar and appellants in R. A. 21/87 on the file of the Addl. District Judge, Bidar. O. S. Nos. 69, 72, 73 & 74/1978 were filed by the plaintiffs against the common defendants to declare them as owners in respect of Sy. No. 59 and 68 of Ballur village, Aurad...
Tag this Judgment!Ms. S. Pushpa and ors. Vs. Government of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)KarLJ594
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.W.P. Nos. 173 to 195 of 2004 connected with W.P. Nos. 656 to 663 of 2004:1. Facts of these cases are as under:Petitioners in these petitions state that they are serving the respondents-Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited ('BESCOM' for short), since 1998 as ledger clerks. According to them the respondents appointed them for proper administration of work and maintenance of records in the offices of the BESCOM in its four zones called, Bangalore West, North, South and Central. The nature of duties of the petitioners is to maintain ledgers, undertaking the work of maintaining record of demand, collection and balance etc. They are being paid a consolidated salary. The Deputy Controller of Accounts informed the fifth respondent that appointment of the persons on contract basis was approved. They were appointed by the then Karnataka Electricity Board ('KEB' for short), but however no orders were issued. The Government passed an Act in the matter of functioning of...
Tag this Judgment!K. Narasimha Murthy Vs. the Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limite ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-2004
Reported in: 2004ACJ1109; ILR2004KAR2471; 2004(3)KarLJ288
S.R. Nayak, J.1. In a bodily-injury case, the injured person being dissatisfied with the award of Rs. 1,48,200/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, has preferred this appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (For short, 'the Act').2. The determination of the quantum of compensation by the decision-maker in this case is niggardly and reflects conservatism to the core and an outstanding orthodoxy in legal reasoning. Values of life and limb have not received due consideration at the hands of the decision-maker. Compensation awarded by the MACT is very much mean and totally unfair 'in the views of reasonable men in general and of Judges in particular', if we can borrow that phrase from Sachs L.J., in Jones v. Griffith . Salmon L.J., in Fletcher v. Autocar and Transporters Limited, said:'. . . the damages awarded should be such that the ordinary sensible man would not instinctively regard them as either mean or extravagant, but would consider them to be sensible a...
Tag this Judgment!B. Shivanna Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1712; 2004(4)KarLJ77
ORDERBhakthavatsala, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged order and decree dated 15.10.2003 of Election Tribunal passed in E.P. No. 1/2002 (Annexure-C and D) on the file of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Kunigal.2. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are represented by Sri H.B. Narayan, learned Government Pleader. Respondent No. 3 is represented by Sri S.K. Venkata Reddy.3. Heard arguments for final disposal.4. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the Writ Petition may be stated as under:-The respondent No. 3 (election Petitioner) herein filed Election Petition No. 1/2002 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Kunigal, contending that after first term of Office of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha came to an end, the 1st Respondent - Deputy Commissioner, by order dated 26-11-2002, appointed the 2nd Respondent as Prescribed Officer to hold election for the Office of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Nademavinapura Grama Panchayat. The Prescribed Officer fixed election on 9.12.2002, but the elect...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sanjeevamma and ors. Vs. G. Krishna and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Kant338; ILR2004KAR2338; 2004(5)KarLJ112
K.L. Manjunath, J.1. Appellant were the defendants in O.S No. 209/94 on the file of the Prl Munsiff, Hospet. Respondent/Plaintiffs filed the said suit to declare the suit property as a public road and to direct the defendants to remove the encroachment made by them marked as ABCD in the plaint sketch while granting a decree of mandatory injunction. According to the plaint averments, the residential house of the plaintiff are situated on either side of the suit property. Suit property is marked as MNOP in the suit sketch. According to them, the area ear-marked as MNOP is the only ingress and aggress for the plaintiffs to reach their houses from the road. According to them, the portion marked as MNOP is measuring east-west 15' and North South 160' contending that the said passage is used by them for the last 30 years and that there is no other way to reach the road from their houses and also on the ground that defendants high-handedly have erected huts on the north-eastern side of the pa...
Tag this Judgment!Mvr Gas Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-2004
Reported in: [2006]144STC446(Kar)
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. The appellant, a registered dealer under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the Act', for short), engaged in the business of sale of LPG (liquid petroleum gas).2. The appellant purchases LPG in bulk from M/s. Reliance Industries Limited and fills it in small cylinders of different capacities and sells such gas in cylinders. It is stated that transferring gas from a bulk container into small cylinders is a complicated process involving use of compressors, evacuating systems, filling guns, etc. It is alleged that without the use of such machinery/equipment, it will not be possible to transfer gas which is received by it in bulk to small cylinders. It is submitted that machinery that are used by the appellant for this purpose fall under Entry 1(iii)(a) of Part M of the Second Schedule to the Act.3. The Government of Karnataka, by notification dated March 31, 2000 issued under Section 8A of the Act reduced the tax payable by a dealer under Section 5 of the Act in res...
Tag this Judgment!Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and anr. Vs. Smt. Shantavva
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2004
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(Kar)162; [2004]267ITR67(KAR); [2004]267ITR67(Karn)
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by the Revenue is against the order of the Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, in ITA No. 439/Bang/1998 relating to asst. yr. 1994-95.2. Respondent's land measuring 2 acres 14 guntas in Gadag-Betgeri was acquired under notification dt. 24th April, 1977, for extension of market yard The land acquisition officer made an award at the rate of 75 paise per sq. ft. in regard to the acquired land. Respondent sought increase in compensation. The Reference Court increased the compensation to Rs. 8.50 per sq. ft. The judgment and award of the Reference Court was challenged in MFA No. 837/1987 before this Court. This Court by judgment dt. 7th Oct., 1992, determined the market price as Rs. 7 per sq. ft. plus solatium and interest.3. The judgment of this Court was challenged by the Land Acquisition Officer before the Supreme Court in CA No. 12884/1996. In terms of the interim orders of this Court and the Supre...
Tag this Judgment!Shreeshyla Co-operative Industrial Estate Ltd. Vs. Sreeshyla Gears and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2004
Reported in: 2004(7)KarLJ60; [2004]52SCL524(Kar)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Company Application 25/2004 in Company Petition No. 17/1980 and other connected company petitions are filed by M/s. Karnataka State Finance Corporation who had been entrusted with the responsibility of selling the assets of the companies under liquidation through a public auction sale.2. The Applicant Corporation is also a secured creditor of the companies under liquidation and they were permitted to stand outside the winding up proceedings and to effect the sale of the assets over which they had a charge and that is how they have conducted the sale of the landed property and building of the companies under liquidation.3. The applicant Corporation got published the auction sale to be held on 19th December, 2003 as per paper publication issued on 1st December, 2003 in the news daily published at Bangalore.4. The reserve price of the properties was fixed at Rs. 7 crores. At the public auction held on 19th December, 2003 amongst various bidders the highest ...
Tag this Judgment!Easi Technologies Private Limited Vs. S.K. Sannakalegowda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Kant337; ILR2004KAR3138; 2004(4)KarLJ55
ORDERH.G. Ramesh, J.1. The order impugned herein arises out of a proceeding instituted by the respondent under Order 33, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking for permission to sue as an indigent person.2. By the impugned order dated 2-12-2003, the Trial Court has dismissed the petitioner's LA. to reject the affidavit dated 29-7-2003 of one J. Subbegowda-the power of attorney holder of the respondent. The said affidavit was filed as evidence in support of the respondent's application for permission to sue as an indigent person.3. Heard learned Counsels appearing for the parties and perused the impugned order.4. It is not disputed by the respondent/applicant that no leave of the Court as contemplated under Order 33, Rule 4 of the CPC was obtained to allow him to appear through an agent. Without granting such leave, the Court, under Order 33, Rule 4 of the CPC, cannot examine the applicant's agent, regarding the merits of the claim and the property of the applicant. This b...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »