Karnataka Court July 2005 Judgments
B. AshwIn Kumar and anr. Vs. the Mysore City Corporation by Its Commis ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR4223; 2005(6)KarLJ49
Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. This second appeal is by the plaintiffs being aggrieved by the concurrent findings of both the Courts below in dismissing the suit filed by them in O.S. No. 936/96 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Mysore and confirming the same in R.A. No. 125/98 by the Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Mysore by orders dated 28.2.98 and 07.08.2000 respectively.2. The plaintiffs in a suit filed before the Civil Court have sought for a declaration that the demand of ground rent, debris removal charges and drainage charges is unauthorised and without sanction of law, which came to be insisted on the plaintiffs to pay along with the licence fee for issuance of building licence and they have also sought for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant-Corporation to issue building licence in respect of LW. 695/93-94 by charging reasonable licence fee. The plaintiffs have sought for the licence to construct apartments consisting of 14 flats in the vacant site of one Go...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Anis S. Vs. Management of Indian Overseas Bank, Rep. by Its Regi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: (2005)IIILLJ804Kant
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed as temporary sub-staff in June 1972 and later on worked on probation and confirmed. On May 23, 1985 he was working as Shroff/Godown keeper in the respondent- bank at its Dasanakoppa branch. He was served with a charge sheet as per Annexure-A, accusing him of not accounting for a sum of Rs. 600/- which was paid to him by one Mr. Guttappa, sub-staff. The amount was paid towards Recurring Deposit instalment on behalf of one A.S. Bhusanurmath and he did not make necessary entries in the accounts of the bank. Similarly, he was also accused of misappropriating IRDP Small Loan in a sum of Rs. 1000/- granted to one Karimsab Madarsab Eligar by drawing the money from his account. In the charge sheet, the particulars of the allegations are clearly set out. Subsequently, on August 9, 1986 an amendment was made to the charge sheet accusing him of forgery of withdrawal slip dated February 25, 1985 on the basis of which the amount was withdra...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Alipeer and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ1099; ILR2006KAR947
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The petitioner in MVC No. 347/2000 travelling in the goods vehicle along with three quintals of ragi. The vehicle met with an accident, resulting personal injuries to the petitioner. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 16,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till payment. The insurer of the lorry is directed to pay the compensation. The insurer is in appeal seeking avoidance of the liability on the ground that the petitioner is an unauthorised passenger in the goods vehicle.2. The petitioner has pleaded and proved that he was travelling in the lorry along with three quintals of ragi, which fits into the definition of the goods under Section 2(13) of the M.V. Act.3. The amended provisions of Section 147 of M.V. Act insist compulsory coverage the risk of owner travelling with goods in a goods vehicle w.e.f. 11.4.1994. However, earlier to the amendment the tariff regulations permitted coverage of risk by a contract on payment of additiona...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Alipeer and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: I(2007)ACC431
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The petitioner in M.V.C. No. 347 of 2000 travelling in the goods vehicle along with three quintals of Ragi. The vehicle met with an accident, resulting personal injuries to the petitioner. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 16,000 with interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of the petition till payment. The insurer of the lorry is directed to pay the compensation. The insurer is in appeal seeking avoidance of the liability on the ground that the petitioner is an unauthorised passenger in the goods vehicle.2. Petitioner has pleaded and proved that he was travelling in the lorry along with three quintals of Ragi., which fits into the definition of the goods under Section 2(13) of the Motor Vehicles Act.3. The amended provisions of Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act insist compulsory coverage of the risk of the owner travelling with goods in a goods vehicle w.e.f. 14th November, 1994. However, earlier to the amendment the tariff regulations permitted...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sarojamma and ors. Vs. Smt. Neelamma and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC567; ILR2005KAR3293; 2005(5)KarLJ66
S. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. In this appeal the appellants have called in question the correctness of the judgment and decree dated 28th November 2002 made in O.S. No. 84 of 1996 by the I Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Davanagere [hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court']. While the appellants in this appeal were the plaintiffs in the suit, respondents were the defendants. The parties in this appeal, in the course of the judgment will be referred to by their status as in the Trial Court.2. The 1st plaintiff claims that she was the wife of Kuruvathi Basavarajappa and plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3 are the children of the 1st plaintiff born to the said Kuruvathi Basavarajappa and while the 1st defendant is one other wife of the said Kuruvathi Basavarajappa, the defendants 2 to 7 were also the children of the 1st defendant and Kuruvathi Basavarajappa; the said Kuruvathi Basavarajappa had expired on 14.3.1992. In spite of the demand made by the plaintiffs for allotment of their 42/100th share and p...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited and ors. Vs. S. Jogin ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)KarLJ240
V. Jagannathan, J.1. Shifting of 500 KV transformer from the second respondent's place to the first respondent's place by the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (appellant herein) has given rise to this lis. The first respondent aggrieved by the shifting of the transformer to his place, approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 22906 of 2001 (S. Joginder Singh Sabarwal v. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) and Ors., : AIR2004Kant141 ) and succeeded in getting a direction from this Court to the appellant herein to shift the transformer to its original place. Aggrieved by this order of the learned Single Judge, the appellant has come up before us for relief.2. Briefly stated, the facts giving raise to this appeal are that the first respondent is the owner of premises bearing Nos. 19 and 20, H. Siddaiah Road, opposite to Urvashi Theatre, Bangalore, and with the establishment of a hotel with a commercial complex in the said premises, the first responden...
Tag this Judgment!C.V. Gajendra Vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR316]; ILR2005KAR5096; 2005(5)KarLJ57
V. Jagannathan, J.1. This appeal arises out of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 15085 of 1994 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein challenging the dismissal order passed by the respondent-Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation ('Corporation' in brief).2. The facts in brief which have given rise to this appeal are as under:The appellant joined the services of the Corporation as a Clerk and moved up in the ladder and reached the position of Divisional Traffic Officer (Class I Junior) in the year 1980. He was transferred to Belgaum Division in the year 1987 and while he was working at that place, the respondent-Corporation invited applications for the post of drivers to work in Belgaum Division. Under the Regulations of the Corporation, the Divisional Traffic Officer is also one of the members of the Selection Authority. The Selection Authority comprises of the Chairman, who is the Divisional Controller of Belgaum Division, and four member...
Tag this Judgment!Chennachari and ors. Vs. S. Saroja and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR4817; 2006(5)KarLJ181
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ Petition at the instance of the tenant who though survived an eviction petition that had been filed by the landlord as against him invoking the provisions of provisos (a), (b), (c) and (f) to Sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 [for short '1961 Act'] was stumped by an order passed by the revisional court exercising jurisdiction under Section 5(1) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 [for short '1999 Act'] in terms of the Order dated 22-9-2003 impugned in this writ petition and who had been directed to vacate and hand over the premises in question, are before this Court questioning the competence and the jurisdiction of the revisional court to pass an order of this nature.2. The brief facts leading to the above petition not in dispute are that the father of the petitioners was a tenant under the father of the respondents in respect of the premises bearing No. 1131/11, F-20, situated at Manandavadi Road, Mysore measuring a...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bramaranbike and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ671
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The deceased in M.V.C. No. 162 of 1999 was travelling in the tractor sitting on the mudguard. On account of rash and negligent driving, the death occurred. Petitioners are the legal representatives of the deceased. Claims Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs. 3,68,600 with interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of petition till payment and directed the driver, owner and the insurer of the tractor to pay the compensation. The insurer is in appeal seeking avoidance of liability.2. The provisions of regulation 28 in Appendix 2 pertaining to the Rules of the Road Regulations, 1989, formulated under Motor Vehicles Act, categorically declares that the driver when driving a tractor shall not carry or allow any person to be carried on the mudguard of a tractor. The effect of the regulation makes any person travelling in a tractor apart from the driver as illegal and would be an unauthorised passenger. The policy of insurance issued does not cover the risk of ...
Tag this Judgment!Poshak Textiles Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and ors ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2005
Reported in: (2008)11VST572(Karn)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition is directed against the order dated January 17, 2005, copy of which is produced as annexure D to the petition, passed by the first appellate authority dismissing the appeal as one barred by time. It is not in dispute that the appeal was presented beyond the outer limit of 180 days and the first appellate authority has rightly rejected the appeal being empowered to entertain the appeal only when it is not beyond the total period of 180 days, though the appeal itself is to be preferred within 30 days and thereafter it is by condoning the delay in preferring the appeal.2. However, Sri Narayana, learned Counsel for the petitioner has a very 2 convincing explanation as to how the petitioner could not present the appeal before the first appellate authority within the permitted time; that the petitioner was pursuing his remedy before the wrong forum, the appeal in the first instance was filed before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, who had initia...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »