Karnataka Court October 2005 Judgments

Patel Rangegowda Vs. the Land Reforms Appellate Authority and ors.

Court: Karnataka

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner, questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 12-5-1989 in No. LRAA(RA) No. 57 of 1986 on the file of the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Hassan District, reversing the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Alur Taluk, Hassan District, Hassan, has presented this land reforms revision petition.2. The petitioner claiming to be the tenant in respect of lands bearing Survey Nos. 18/2, 51, 66 and 65 measuring 29 guntas; 1 acre 6 guntas; 6 guntas and 32 guntas respectively, situate at Bellavara Village, Alur Taluk, Hassan District, had filed Form 7 for grant of occupancy rights in his favour. The said application had come up for consideration before the Land Tribunal, Alur-2nd respondent herein on 26-10-1979. The Land Tribunal has granted the occupancy rights in favour of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by the Land Tribunal, the 4th respondent-deceased E.G. Ramesh had filed writ petition before this Court in No. 9690 of...

V.V. Sivaram and ors. Vs. Foseco India Limited

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2006]133CompCas160(Kar); 2006(1)KarLJ386

Anand Byrareddy, J.1. The defendants are in appeal, challenging the grant of an order of temporary injunction restraining them from manufacturing or selling or in any manner dealing with any product similar or identical to a product of the plaintiff, respondent herein, known as Turbostop, a contoured impact pad which is used in steel plants to withstand the impact of molten steel that is poured into a vessel called. Tundish, in casting and processing of steel. The contoured impact pad prevents the molten steel from perforating the tundish and enables the controlled containment and flow of steel.2. The parties are referred to by their rank before the Trial Court for convenience.3. The facts of the case as narrated by the parties are as follows.-The plaintiff is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and was established in the year 1958. It is engaged in the manufacture of specialty chemicals and allied products pertaining to Foundry and steel industry. It has its own resea...

Arecanut Processing and Sale Co-operative Society Limited Vs. Mohammad ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR120; 2005(6)KarLJ500

H.L. Dattu, J.1. The appellant before us is a Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as 'the Act'). The capital of the Society is primarily contributed by the members those, who have interest in the capital funds of the Society. We have reason to say so, which will be borne out as the judgment proceeds.2. Respondent 1 and respondent 2 are the father and the son. During the pendency of the dispute filed by the appellant-Society, respondent 1 expired. With the permission of the Arbitrator, the appellant-Society has impleaded respondents l(a) to l(i) as the legal representatives of deceased respondent 1.3. The deceased respondent 1 and respondent 2 are the growers of arecanut. They are also members of the appellant-Society. For their agricultural operations, they had borrowed certain funds from the appellant-Society, on the security of the arecanut that were being sold through ...

The State of Karnataka by Its Secretary and anr. Vs. Ninganagouda Shan ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2005KAR5663; 2006(1)KarLJ98

ORDERS.R. Nayak, J.1. The State of Karnataka represented by the Secretary to Government, Finance Department and the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bangalore, being aggrieved by the order of the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal at Bangalore (for short, 'Tribunal') dated 03.12.2002 passed in Application No. 5101 of 2002 have preferred this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:The respondent herein while serving as Second Division Assistant on probation in the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, 2nd Circle, Bijapur, was issued with a charge memo dated 20.11.2000 by the 2nd petitioner herein who is the Disciplinary Authority under Rule 12 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (for short 'CCA Rules'). The said charge memo is marked as Annexure-A1 and produced at page-21 of the material papers. It reads as follows:The respondent-delinquent s...

Canara Bank Vs. Vara Trading Co. and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2006Kant88; I(2007)BC541; [2006]133CompCas482(Kar); ILR2006KAR130; 2006(4)KarLJ239

V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. This Regular First Appeal is filed by the plaintiff-Bank questioning the correctness of the Judgment and Decree dated 11-9-1998 in OS 3469/90 passed by the 16th Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore in dismissing the original suit with costs and sought for setting aside the same and prayed to pass Judgment and Decree as prayed in the suit, urging various legal contentions.2. The rank of the parties is referred to in this Judgment as per their ranking before the Trial Court for the sake of convenience.3. The plaintiff filed suit against the defendants to recover a sum of Rs. 3,68,951,30 together with interest at 19.5% p.a. compounded quarterly from the date of suit till the date of realization by sale of the schedule property belonging to the second and third defendants which is mortgaged in favour of Bank and further if, sale proceeds are found to be insufficient then, the decree against the defendants to recover the same personally from them by stating various f...

New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Sunil and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007ACJ278; 2006(6)KarLJ506

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. Petitioner in M.V.C. No. 1206 of 1998 has filed a claim petition seeking compensation for the personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs. 35,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till payment. The Tribunal has directed the owner and insurer of the vehicle to pay the compensation. Aggrieved by this order, the insurer is in appeal.2. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Appaji (since deceased) and Anr. v. M. Krishna and Anr. 2004 ACJ 1289 (Kar.) (DB), has hold that the provisions of Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 would not apply in a case where the victim himself is negligent in causing the accident and no compensation could be paid in such cases. It is further laid down that in a case of composite negligence of involvement of two vehicles causing the accident irrespective of negligence of vehicle pertaining to the petitioner, a claim under Section 163-A of ...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunil and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: II(2007)ACC684

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. Petitioner in M.V.C. No. 1206 of 1998 has filed a claim petition seeking compensation for the personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 35,000 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of petition till payment. The Tribunal has directed the owner and insurer of vehicle to pay the compensation. Aggrieved by this order, the insurer is in appeal.2. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Appaji v. M. Krishna , has held that the provisions of Section 163 A of the Motor Vehicles Act would not apply in a case where the victim himself is negligent in causing the accident and no compensation could be paid in such cases. It is further laid down that in the case of composite negligence of involvement of two vehicles causing the accident irrespective of negligence of vehicle pertaining to petitioner, a claim under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act would lie and when the owner of the of...

Smt. Gangubai Basappa Hadapad @ Dhanakshirur and ors. Vs. Mahagundappa ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2005KAR5838; 2006(5)KarLJ428

Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. The following substantial questions of law were raised at the time of admission on 18.10.2000.1. Whether the appellate Court was justified in reversing the judgment and decree of the trial Court dismissing the suit on the ground that the sisters of the appellant were not made as parties even though when the plaintiffs stated that they had relinquished their rights over the properties?2. Similarly whether the appellate Court was justified in holding that Shankaravva was not made as a party to this suit even thought she failed to respond to the Court summons?2. The suit was failed by the plaintiff seeking for 1/3 rd share and separate possession in respect of the suit properties except Sy. No. 32/1+2 of Dhanakshirur Village and to declare that the plaintiff is entitled to half share in Sy. No. 32/1+2 of the said village by effecting partition by metes and bounds.3. One Shankarappa was the propositus who had three sons and two daughters. One of the sons-Basappa fi...

Miss Dhanalakshmi Vs. Principal Secretary to Govt, Commerce and Indust ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2005KAR5845

ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. Petitioner is before this Court Challenging the order dated 18.06.2005 passed by the 2nd respondent vide Annexure-L whereby the request made by the petitioner seeking payment of salary and allowances attached to the post of Junior Assistant is deferred until completion of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against her. The second relief sought by the petitioner is for Issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to treat the petitioner as duly confirmed as Junior Assistant upon completion of six months period of probation.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the she was appointed temporarily on 20th March, 1996 as 'Assistant' under the respondents. Petitioner was regularly appointed as Junior Assistant on 16.09.2000 with a condition that she shall be on probation for a period of six months. It is stipulated in the order of appointment, copy of which is produced at Annexure-B, that during the period of probation she would be paid the minimum pay ad...

Smt. Channakha and ors. Vs. Mahantappa

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006CriLJ1560

ORDERH. Billappa, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 20-5-2005 passed by the Family Court at Bijapur, in Criminal Misc. No. 290/2003 dismissing the petition filed by the petitioners for maintenance.2. The petitioner No. 1 is the wife of the respondent. The petitioners 2 to 4 are their children. They filed petition under Section 125, Cr.P.C. claiming monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month to each of them on the ground that the petitioner No. 1 is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and that after the marriage the respondent started ill-treating her and that she tolerated the ill-treatment with a fond hope that the relationship would improve but it did not and that she narrated her plight to her parents and that they advised the respondent to behave properly but he did not change his behaviour and that she was constrained to file a suit for permanent alimony and that it ended in a compromise and that she went to the house of the respondent and ...