Karnataka Court March 2005 Judgments
Syed Abdul Salam and ors. Vs. the Chief Executive Officers, Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR2084; 2005(4)KarLJ314
ORDERBhakthavatsala, J.1. This Revision Petition is directed against order dated 6.11.2003 made in Application No. 3/2003 on the file of Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Bangalore Division, Bangalore (in short, the 'K W T') dismissing the application seeking cancellation, of the election held to the Managing Committee of Shah Inayath & Jamia Mosque, Gouribidanur Taluk, on 5.1.2003.2. The Respondent No. 1 is represented by Sri D L N Rao, learned Counsel. Respondent No. 2 has been deleted. Respondent Nos. 3 ro 23 are represented by Sri Prabhuling K Navadagi.3. Heard arguments of the learned counsels for the parties on the point of maintainability of the Revision Petition.4. Sri Tanveer Pasha, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, submitted that though the Revision Petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act, 1995 (in short, 'the Act'), it may be treated as Revision Petition filed under Section 83(9) of the Act.5. The P...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. M. Chandravathi and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-2005
Reported in: III(2005)ACC322; 2005ACJ1465; ILR2005KAR3671
B.S. Patil, J. 1. The appellant Smt. M. Chandravathi, and her minor son M.K. Naveen Kumar have presented this appeal challenging the order passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal rejecting the claim made by them seeking compensation under the provisions of Section 125 of the Railways Act, 1989, read with Section 123(c), 124 and 124(A) and Section 17(2) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.2. Relevant facts excluding unnecessary details, that are essential for the purpose of disposal of this appeal can be set out as under:M.G.K. Murthy, husband of the appellant No. 1 and the father of minor appellant No.2 died an unfortunate death in an accident that occurred on 15.11.1983. The deceased was travelling in the train from Madras port to Madras city. He was on duty. There was heavy rush in the train. He was pushed out of the train. He was thrown away near a water column between Madras port and Madras Park and succumbed to the resultant injuries on the same day.3. The appellants herein did...
Tag this Judgment!Tashi Delek Gaming Solutions (Private) Limited and ors. Vs. State of K ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Kant261; ILR2005KAR1548; 2005(2)KarLJ403
N.K. Sodhi, C.J.1. By notification dated 24-7-2004 issued in exercise of powers conferred by Section 5 of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 (for short, 'the Act') the Government of Karnataka declared the State to be a free zone from online and internet lotteries and prohibited the sale of all computerized and online lottery tickets marketed and operated through vending machines, terminals, electronic machines and tickets sold through internet in the State of Karnataka with effect from the date of the notification. This notification was challenged by the State of Sikkim along with the three appellants herein before the learned Single Judge on the ground that the notification was arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal and without legislative competence and therefore unconstitutional. It was contended on behalf of the writ petitioners that the said notification was in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in B.R. Enterprises v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. : (1999)9SCC700 ...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Arcee Steel Private Limited and anr. Vs. Bharat Overseas Bank Li ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Kant287; III(2006)BC589; [2005]127CompCas537(Kar); ILR2005KAR2859; 2005(2)KarLJ472
K. Bhakthavatsala, J. 1. This is an appeal filed under Order 43, Rule 1(j) of the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging the order dated 13-10-1995 made in Execution Case No. 1066 of 1996 on the file of XV Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, rejecting I.A. 7 filed under Order 21, Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the judgment-debtors for setting aside the sale.2. The respondent 1 is represented by Sri Y.V. Parthasarathy. The respondent 2-auction purchaser is represented by Sri Ananthram.3. Heard arguments.4. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the appeal may be stated as under.--The respondent 1-decree-holder filed Execution Case No. 1066 of 1986 in pursuance of recovery of money in a sum of Rs. 29,44,415/- made in O.S. No. 623 of 1982, on the file of City Civil Judge, Bangalore City. In the Execution Case, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed to effect sale of schedule property viz., One Center less Bar Turning Machine (manufactured by M/s. GKW Limite...
Tag this Judgment!The Executive Engineer (Elecl) (O and M) Division, Karnataka Electrici ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR2183
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The beneficiary as well as the owners of the acquired land being aggrived by the awards passed by the Civil Court, have preferred these appeals under Section 54 of the land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short, 'the Act'). M.F.A. Nos. 2451, 2453, 2457 and 2461 of 2001 are by the beneficiary, where as M.F.A Nos. 3428, 3429, 3430 and 3431 of 2001 are by the owners of the acquired land.2. 19 acres 24 guntas of land comprised in R.S. No. 395 which is situate within the limits of Gadag-Betgeri Municipality was acquired for a public purpose, to wit, for the purpose of installation of electricity power transmission station at Gadag, building KEB office, ware-house etc, by issuing Section 4(1) Notification dated 15.09.1994. The land in Survey No. 395 is phoned in favour of four brothers and they are the claimants in LAC Nos. 1 of 1997, 2 of 1997, 3 of 1997 and 4 of 1997 and each block measures 4 acres 36 guntas. The Land Acquisition Officer after conducting award enquiry placing ...
Tag this Judgment!Life Insurance Corporation of India Respdt. by Its Divisional Manager ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR777]; ILR2005KAR2701; 2005(5)KarLJ564
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. In these writ petitions, the Life Insurance Corporation of India has assailed the show cause notices and demand notices issued by the respondent-Labor Inspectors under the provisions of the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishment Act, 1961 (for short 'Act of 1961) r/w the Karnataka Shops and Commercials Establishment Rules, 1963 (for short 'Rules of 1963) and the Karnataka Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1965 (for short 'Act of 1965'). The parties being common and common questions of fact and that of law having arisen, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petitions are clubbed, heard together and are disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioner having questioned the issue of show cause notices and demand notices calling upon it to comply with the provisions of the aforesaid Acts, has in addition sought for a declaration that it is exempt from the application of the provisions of the Act of 1965 and the Act of 1961.3. The claim of t...
Tag this Judgment!Vidyavardhaka Sangha by Its Honorary Secretary Vs. State of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR4907; 2006(3)KarLJ554
Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. The appellant in this appeal was the petitioner in writ petition No. 1302 of 2000. In this appeal, the appellant has called in question the correctness of the Order dated 14th August 2003 made by the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition of the appellant. In the writ petition the appellant had called in question the constitutional validity of Rules 12,14 and 15 of the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Classifications, Regulation and Prescription of Curricula etc.) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The learned single Judge, on consideration of the contentions advanced on behalf of the appellant challenging the correctness of the Rules referred to above, took the view that the Rules were framed by the State in exercise of the power conferred on it under Section 145 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). He also took the view that one of the purpose of the Act under Section 3(2)(j) of the Act ...
Tag this Judgment!Neelakantappa Since Deceased Through L.Rs. Vs. Murugesh Since Deceased ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC893; 2006ACJ2332
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The petitioners in M.V.C. No. 559 of 1996 are awarded com pensation for death of one Ramaswamy. The Tribunal directed the owner of the tractor-trailer to pay the compensation. The claim against the insurer is dismissed. The owner is in appeal seeking fastening of the liability on the insurer. The owner-appellant is dead; his L.Rs. have come on record.2. The material in criminal prosecution discloses that owner of the tractor-trailer was driving the vehicle without licence and caused the accident. The owner-appellant takes a plea before the Tribunal that he was not driving the vehicle. But other person was driving who was duly licensed.3. The Tribunal has rightly rejected the plea of the owner-cum-driver on the basis of authentic material found in the related criminal case.4. The appellant submits that the insurer should pay compensation to the petitioners and later on should seek reimbursement from the insured, in view of the ruling of the Apex Court in National I...
Tag this Judgment!Shivagouda Vs. the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies and Head ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR1689; 2005(4)KarLJ82
ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. By the impugned order dated 9.3.2005 vide Annexure-'A' the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies has directed the 2nd respondent herein to prepare final voters list of 'A Class' members by including the members who have paid the share capital of Rs. 2,000/-.2. It is not in dispute that the respondents 4 to 514 were enrolled as 'A Class' members of the 2nd respondent-sugar Factory by paying share capital of Rs. 2,000/- at the time of commencement of the factory as per the Bye-laws existed then. In the year 2003, the State Government published Model Bye-laws for all the sugar factories in the State, which are to be adopted by the individual sugar factories at their discretion. Respondent No. 2-Sugar Factory in its General Body Meeting held on 30.9.2003, adopted the said Model Bye-laws in their entirety. However, the said Bye-laws came to be registered on 24.12.2003. The relevant portion of the Model Bye-laws is produced at Annexure-'M' to the Writ Peti...
Tag this Judgment!D. Ramesh Vs. the Management of Karnataka State Road Transport Corpora ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2005
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR798]; ILR2005KAR1703
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, while working as a conductor in the respondent-Corporation, remained absent from 17.4.1997 without prior permission or sanction of leave. The disciplinary authority initiated disciplinary proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Karnataka State Road Transport (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations (for short the 'Regulations', by issuing an Articles of charge dt. 24/6.7.1998, Annexure-A, to which the workman is said to have submitted an explanation dt. 13.8.1998, Annexure-B. The disciplinary authority not being satisfied with the explanation offered and being of the opinion that there were grounds to enquire into the truth of the charges appointed an Enquiry Officer who after holding an enquiry, recorded a finding that the charges were proved. The disciplinary authority, on the basis of the said findings and on an independent assessment of the material on record, held the workman guilty of the charges and considering the gravity of t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »