Karnataka Court April 2004 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.
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Unni Menon
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)KarLJ572
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. The Union of India and the establishment of the Central Administrative Tribunal are aggrieved by the order dated 1st March, 2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore ('CAT' for short) directing the principal office of the CAT to reconsider the representation of the applicant-respondent herein and pass suitable orders thereon.2. The respondent filed application before the CAT for promotion to the cadre of Senior Accounts Officer pursuant to the implementation of the IV pay Commission with effect from 1-4-1995 on the ground that persons who are his juniors in his parent department viz., Accountant General's office were promoted as Senior Accounts Officer on completion of three years service. He claimed that the nature of duties performed and the responsibilities shouldered by the respondent in the CAT are similar to that of the duties and responsibilities shouldered by the Senior Accounts Officers in the Indian Audit an...
Smt. Vattikoti Kantamma Vs. T. Suryanarayana and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR3350; 2004(4)KarLJ257
K. Sreedhar Rao, J. 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gangavathi passed the impugned order. The appellant-plaintiff filed a suit seeking declaration of title in respect of agricultural land in Sy. No. 192, measuring 20 acres 29 guntas situated at Hanawal Village with a consequential relief of injunction against the defendants. The suit is for the purpose of jurisdiction valued at Rs. 10 lakhs and for the purpose of Courts fee valued at Rs. 1,000/-.2. The Trial Court takes the view that the different valuation for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction is impermissible and the Court fee is to be paid on the basis of the pecuniary jurisdictional values stated in the plaint, Accordingly, directed the payment of deficit Court fee on or before 17-9-2003 and also directed that if Court fee is not paid, the plaint is to be returned to the plaintiff.3. I find the order is faulty for more than one reason. The non-payment of deficit Court fee within the time prescribed under Order 7, Rule...
Smt. T. Susheela and anr. Vs. State by Jayanagar Police Station
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)KarLJ448
ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. This petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. to quash the impugned FIR in Cr. No. 359 of 2001, dated 25-6-2001 of Jayanagar Police Station, Bangalore, mainly on the ground that the respondent-police have failed to inform themselves that the facts alleged in the FIR do not even remotely attract the ingredients of the offence of cheating. Petitioners being the absolute owners of the property have sold the said property to the complainant under a registered sale deed.2. The case of the respondent-prosecution is that the petitioner 1 suppressing the very fact about the attachment of the property by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, sold the same to the complainant and subsequently after receipt of the notice the petitioner 1 has paid a sum of Rs. 1,08,00,000/- therefore, initiation of proceedings against the petitioner is in accordance with law.3. Heard the arguments of the Advocate for the petitioners and the respondent.4. During the course of arguments the learne...
Jindal thermal Power Company Ltd. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Cor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR3463; 2004(5)KarLJ161
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The appellant, namely, Jindal Thermal Power Company Limited is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 engaged in the generation and supply of power in the State of Karnataka. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited, for short, The 'KPTCL', the first respondent herein, is a Company established under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 pursuant to the enactment of the Karnataka Electricity Reforms Act, 1999, for short, 'the Act' whereunder the Karnataka Electricity Board, the KEB, for short, was trifurcated into three Companies. Respondent No. 2 is Government of Karnataka (GOK).2. Pursuant to the Notifications and the subsequent clarifications issued by the Government of India in March 1992 setting out the norms for determining the tariff payable to the generating Companies, by an order dated 7th March, 1994, approval was granted by GOK to the appellant for setting up a power project of 300 MW and selling power directly to i...
Smt. Manjula and ors. Vs. the Chief Minister, Government of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)KarLJ495
N.K. Jain, C.J.1. Writ Appeal Nos. 4001 and 6910 to 6939 of 2001 have been filed by the petitioners of various writ petitions against the common order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. Nos. 15209 to 15269 of 2000, dated 28-5-2001.The necessary facts in brief are that the appellants are the residents of the layout formed in Sy. No. 1 of Vijayashreepura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, Mysore. They purchased the properties and constructed residential houses long back, They had filed Writ Petition Nos. 9203 to 9224 of 2000, which were clubbed by the learned Single Judge and dismissed by a common order dated 28-5-2001. It is stated that K.B. Ramachandraraje Urs, claiming to be the owner of the property, questioned the acquisition proceedings wherein number of persons claiming to be the tenants of the said land had made applications for grant of occupancy rights. The Land Tribunal, after hearing, held that the property is a Government land. The same was challenged by KB. Ramach...
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. K. Sundaramma Alias Su ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC49; IV(2005)ACC169; 2005ACJ797; 2004(6)KarLJ637
Ram Mohan Reddy, J.1. The insurer of the motor vehicle involved in the accident being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 24-7-2002 passed in MVC No. 2839 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (for short, the 'MACT), has preferred this appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the 'Act').2. It is not in dispute that one Neelakantha succumbed to the fatal injuries on 30-7-2000 involving the motor vehicle being a motor-cycle bearing registration No. KA. 04.H.9346 belonging to the 8th respondent and insured by the appellant. In the claim petition filed by the dependents of the deceased, the appellant herein was arraigned as 1st respondent, who, entered appearance, resisted the claim by filing its statement of objections. The 2nd respondent, the owner of the offending vehicle, though served with the notice, remained absent. The MACT, framed issues, recorded the evidence of the 3rd petitioner as P.W. 1, marked 11 documents ...
Clifford George Pinto Vs. M.R. Shenava and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-08-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Kant167; 2005(1)KarLJ458
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The appeal filed against the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 62 of 1984 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mangalore. The Trial Court disposed of the suits O.S. Nos. 62 of 1984 and 265 of 1983 by recording common evidence and common judgment.2. The appellant is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 62 of 1984 filed for declaration that the sale deeds Exs. P. 1 and P. 2 executed by the first defendant are null and void and seek consequential relief of possession free from all encumbrances. The 4th defendant filed a separate suit O.S. No. 265 of 1983 against the second defendant for the relief of specific performance in respect of the property, which is a subject-matter of O.S. No. 62 of 1984.3. The appellant in this proceeding will be referred to as plaintiff and the respondents would be referred to as defendants for convenient discussion.4. According to the plaintiff the suit properties belonged to his mother Mrs. Aquis Pinto. After her demise, the...
State of Karnataka and anr. Vs. T. Chandrashekhar and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-07-2004
Reported in: 2004(7)KarLJ222
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. As common questions of law and facts are involved, these writ petitions were heard together and are disposed off by this common order.2. The applicants in O.A. Nos. 3180 to 3183 of 1997 who were working as F.D.As in the Directorate of India Systems of Medicine and Homeopathy moved the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore ('the Tribunal' for short), with a prayer to quash the inter se ranking in their cadre and further, praying for a direction to prepare a fresh seniority list after reviewing the promotion to the next higher cadre of Superintendent. The Tribunal allowed these applications in part. Being aggrieved the Department has filed W.P. Nos. 43433 to 43436 of 2002 and the applicant in O.A. No. 3182 of 1997 has filed W.P. No. 19699 of 2003.The applicant in O.A. No. 1856 of 1996, Head Accountant in Sub-Treasury Office, Udupi, filed the application before the Tribunal with a prayer to prepare a fresh gradation list and place him above the third...
Welcomegroup Windsor Manor Sheraton and Towers, Rep. by Its Vice Presi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-06-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR369]; ILR2004KAR2231; 2004(4)KarLJ223
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this writ appeal is whether the laundry division of the Star Hotel which the appellant-company runs in Bangalore is a factory within the meaning of the Factories Act. A learned Single Judge of this Court having answered that question in the affirmative, this appeal by the company assails the correctness of that view.2. The appellant-company is running a Hotel under the name and style of Windsor Manor in Bangalore. For the benefit of its guests, the Hotel maintains a laundry which is used for the upkeep of the rooms, comfort of the guests and cleanliness of the linen used in the restaurants. The appellant had it appears assigned the laundry work to an outside agency on contract basis who was carrying on the said work within the precincts of the Hotel. The Contractor had secured a registration under the Factories Act which it appears to have surrendered with the termination of the contract and removal of its machi...
P. Rajappa Alias B.P. Rajappa Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-06-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)KarLJ180
N.K. Jain, C.J.1. W.A. No. 1535 of 2004 is filed by P. Rajappa alias B.P. Rajappa against the common order dated 28-1-2004 passed in W.P. No. 49979 of 2003 and connected matters, wherein the learned Single Judge after considering the objections and the material on record by an elaborate order dismissed the writ petitions and has not interfered with the acquisition proceedings and notifications dated 10-12-2001 and 23-10- 2003.The petitioners in other writ petitions claiming to be the owners of respective survey numbers have also challenged the order of the learned Single Judge. W.A. Nos. 1595 and 1596 of 2004 have been filed by P. Narayanappa and B.N. Somashekar Reddy, the petitioners in W.P. Nos. 51126 and 51127 of 2003 respectively; W.A. No. 1597 of 2004 has been filed by K. Jamuna, the petitioner in W.P. No. 51548 of 2003; W.A. Nos. 1598 and 1599 of 2004 has been filed by Sardar, the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 49270 and 49499 of 2003; W.A. Nos. 1600 and 1601 of 2004 have been filed by ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »