Karnataka Court July 2005 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.
B.D.K. Process Controls Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. Bharatiya Mazdoor Sa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR306]; ILR2005KAR5110; (2006)IILLJ151Kant
P. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. In this appeal, the appellants have called in question the correctness of the order dated 29th August 2001 made in W.P.Nos. 25578-79/2000 by the learned Single Judge wherein he has confirmed the award dated 9th May 2000 made in Complaint No. 1 /1999 by the Industrial Tribunal, Hubli (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal').2. The facts in brief are as follows:The appellants 1 and 2 are the Private Limited Companies incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act. They have set up their factory at Gokul Road, Hubli. It is the case of the respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the workmen-Union') that 37 employees working in the establishment of the appellants went on strike on 22nd February 1999 which was prohibited by the Government by means of its Order dated 15th May 1999. Thereafter, the Union of India referred the dispute between the workmen-Union and the appellants to the Tribunal. During the pendency of the reference, the workmen-Union made ...
United India Insurance Company Limited and ors. Vs. Hanamanthappa and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ2794; ILR2006KAR1498
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. All the appeals arise out of the same accident Rule 2 is the owner of the tractor-trailer owning agricultural land. The employees of Rule 2 working in the agricultural land were returning in the tractor to the village from the land. In the course of journey, the accident took place resulting in death of two inmates and personal injuries to four persons. The legal representatives of the deceased have filed MVC 174/00 and MVC 175/00. MVC 176/00 and MVC 175/00 MVC 176/00 to MVC 179/00 are filed by the injured seeking compensation for the personal injuries. The appellant-insurer has taken the plea that the inmates are the unauthorised passengers in the tractor trailer and that the insurer does not incur any legal liability to pay compensation. It is said that the policy is an Act policy.2. The Tribunal rejected the contention of the insurer and directed the insurer to pay the compensation. Hence the appeals.3. The facts and evidence disclose that the inmates of the tr...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. G.N. Gopalagowda and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ2771
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The petitioner in M.V.C. No. 1903 of 1997, a police constable sustained personal injuries in a motor vehicle accident. The F.I.R., Exh. R1, is lodged by one Suryanarayana Rao, P.C. No. 6806 of Malleshwaram Police Station. The first informant is a witness to the incident. The contents of F.I.R. discloses that the petitioner was riding a scooter bearing No. KA 02-E 1779 in a rash and negligent manner on the Sampige Road hit against a tree, as a result he fell down and sustained injuries. The F.I.R., Exh. R1, names the petitioner as accused of committing the offence of rash and negligent driving. Very strangely a final report under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code is filed indicting one Laxminarayana, driver of an auto bearing No. KA-04 6173 as accused to have caused the accident by dashing against the petitioner. The driver of the auto has appeared before the criminal court and admitted guilt and paid a fine of Rs. 1,250. The auto is insured with the appel...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hanamanthappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: II(2007)ACC192
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. All the appeals arise out of the same accident. Respondent No. 2 is the owner of the tractor-trailer owning agricultural land. The employees of respondent No. 2 working in the agricultural land were returning in the tractor to the village from the land. In the course of journey, accident took place resulting in death of two inmates and personal injuries to four persons. The legal representatives of the deceased have filed M.V.C. Nos. 174 and 175 of 2000. M. V.C. Nos. 176 to 179 of 2000 are filed by the injured seeking compensation for the personal injuries. The appellant insurer has taken the plea that the inmates are unauthorised passengers in the tractor-trailer and that the insurer does not incur any legal liability to pay compensation. It is said that the policy is an Act policy.2. The Tribunal rejected the contention of the insurer and directed the insurer to pay the compensation. Hence the appeals.3. The facts and evidence disclose that the inmates of the tr...
K.S. Ramachandra Rao Vs. Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Through the Regi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR3505; 2005(5)KarLJ42
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner, questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 30th July 2002 in Appeal No. 522/2000 on the file of the first respondent-Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore and also the award dated 27th May 2000 in Dispute No. D.R.D. 820/88-89 on the file of the third respondent-Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies vide Annexures A and F respectively, has presented the instant petition. Further, he has sought for a direction, directing the respondent-Bank to release the goods pledged by the petitioner including the missing goods and direct the fourth respondent-Bank to account for the remittance of Rs. 10,720/- made by petitioner under Exhibits P.21 to P30 and also disallow the interest and penal interest calculated by Bank on the principal amount up to date.2. The undisputed facts of the case are that, the petitioner had availed a loan of Rs. 35,000/- on 29th September 1975 from the fourth respondent-Industrial Co-operative Bank, Hassan, (h...
Varadaraju Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4180; ILR2005KAR4478; 2006(2)KarLJ616
ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. An unsuccessful petitioner-accused has come up with this petition, challenging the order dated 27-12-2004 in S.C. No. 64/2002, passed by the Fast Track Court-VIII Sessions, Bangalore City.2. The brief facts leading to the case are the petitioner has been chargesheeted for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 420 of the I.P.C. The trial of the case was excepted to commence on 27-12-2004 and the trial was to be conducted in an in camera form. At that time, the learned Counsel for the petitioner-accused submitted before the Court-below to conduct the trial in the Court hall itself in the form of in camera, excluding the presence of unconcerned, as it is a normal procedure and it is not convenient to hold and conduct trial in the private chamber of the Trial Court. But the request of the learned Counsel for the petitioner was rejected and the Trial Court, directed the petitioner-accused, the Counsel for the petitioner and the prosecutor to come to the chamber of...
In Re: Hindhivac Private Limited and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: [2005]128CompCas266(Kar); ILR2005KAR4523; [2006]71SCL423(Kar)
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. In both these petitions, petitioners seek sanction of the scheme of amalgamation, Annexure-A. Hence, these petitions are clubbed, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioner in Company Petition No. 15/05 is M/s Hindhivac Private Limited (for short the 'transferee company'), a company, incorporated on 26.3.2001 under the Companies Act, 1956, for short 'Act', having its registered office at Site No. 17. Phase 1, Peenya Industrial Area, Bangalore-58.3. The main objects of the transferee company is to carry on business to take over the vacuum systems and pumps division of the company known as M/s Hind High Vacuum Company Private Limited together with its assets and liabilities under a scheme of amalgamation, amongst other objects set out in the Memorandum of Association, Annexure-B.4. The authorised share capital of the transferee company is Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rs. two crores only) divided into 2,00,000 equity shares of Rs. 10/-...
Malagouda Jinagouda Patil Vs. Shantappa Yeshwant Mirji and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)KarLJ314
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. The facts of the case in M.F.A. No. 60 of 2001 are as follows.--A Public Charitable Trust by the name of Shri (108) Acharya Ratna Dashabushan Digambar Jain Ashram Trust in Chikkodi Taluk ('the Trust' for short) was registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 ('the BPT Act' for short) as on 31-5-1968. The general body of the Trust consisted of three categories of members, namely, grand patrons, patrons and ordinary members. There was a Managing Committee consisting of nine members, of whom five were chosen from amongst the grand persons, three from among the patrons and one from among the ordinary members. The general body was required to elect the Managing Committee for a term of three years, at a time. As per the report filed with the Assistant Charity Commissioner there were twenty-two members and nine elected Trustees. The said report was approved in Enquiry No. 19 of 1968 as on 11-7-1968. Thereafter there is no indication of any meetings or elections. ...
West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(103)ECC305; 2007(212)ELT305(Kar); ILR2005KAR4455
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and claims as a company engaged in the manufacture of paper, paper board and duplex boards of all kinds, falling under Chapter-48 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 [for short, the Act].2. The present writ petition is in the context of denial of concession in the rate of excise duty imposed on the paper and paperboards manufactured by the petitioner, though claimed in terms of Excise Notification No. 48/2004 dated 10-9-2004. The petitioner in fact had addressed a communication to the officer concerned of the Central Excise Department in terms of communication dated 20-9-2004, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-D to the writ petition, indicating that the petitioner would avail of the concessional excise duty at the rate of 12% ad volorem as against the normal duty at 16% ad volorem on the produce cleared with effect from 10-9-2004, as the petitioner was of the view that thoug...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Rep. by Its Deputy Manager Vs. Sri V. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ2424
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. On a Vankatash is deceased in M.V.C. No. 44/1996. Petitioners are the parents. The Tribunal awarded compensation to the petitioners and directed the insurer of the Tractor-Trailer to pay compensation. The insurer is in appeal seeking avoidance of liability on the ground that the deceased is an unauthorised passenger in Tractor-Trailer.2. The Tractor-Trailer was loaded with sugarcane. According to the petitioners, the deceased was travelling as a loader and he had to unload the sugarcane at the factory. The owner of the Tractor-Trailer in the avoidance states that the deceased is his nephew and not employed as a loader for the Tractor-Trailer.3. The inquest report prepared by the 1.0. sometime immediately after the accident discloses that the deceased was travelling as a loader in the Tractor-Trailer. The Tribunal rejected the evidence of the owner and upheld the contention of the petitioner that deceased was a loader in the Tractor-Trailer.4. The conduct or R.V.I ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »