Karnataka Court September 2005 Judgments

Suresh Vs. Prithviraj Dhanraj JaIn and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: IV(2006)ACC472

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The petitioner in M.V.C. No. 65 of 2003 sustained lacerated wound over the right parietal and occipital area of scalp, lacerated wound over the upper lip, lacerated wound over the right thigh and swelling over the left part of the chin and suffered fracture of mandible and dislocation hip joint with head injuries. The petitioner took treatment at Kolhapur Hospital and also at Ghataprabha Hospital. The petitioner is operated and open reduction is done. The doctor has assessed the total body disability at 40% as per Ex. P. 82. Petitioner is a businessman. The petitioner is a income-tax assessee. The income of the petitioner to be assessed at Rs. 3,000 p.m.2. On re-examination of the facts and evidence, Rs. 40,000 to be awarded towards pain and agony. Medical bills are produced for Rs. 91,452. In all the petitioner is entitled to Rs. 1,10,000 for medical expenses and incidental expenses relating to treatment, Rs. 40,000 to be awarded towards loss of amenities and dis...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. D.Y. Narayanswami and ors.

Court: Karnataka

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. Petitioners in M.V.C. No. 316 of 1991 renumbered as M.V.C. No. 71 of 1995 are the wife and children of the deceased Shivakumar Setty, who died in a motor vehicle accident. The deceased is said to be a casual employee working in Backward Classes and Minority Hostels as a helper in the kitchen. The income of deceased is said to be Rs. 1,300 per month, according to the petitioner.2. Tribunal by its Order dated 5.5.2001, awarded compensation of Rs. 91,800 with interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of petition till payment. In the first instance, the Tribunal directed the owner of the lorry and the insurer to pay the compensation. It appears that the petitioners filed an application for review. The Claims Tribunal by its Order dated 14.11.2002, allowed the application and directed the insurer to pay the compensation. The insurer is in appeal seeking avoidance of liability on the ground that the deceased is an unauthorised passenger in the goods vehicle.3. Init...

M. Shivakumar and anr. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner and the Land Acq ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2005KAR5453; 2006(6)KarLJ692

N.K. Patil, J.1. This appeal by claimants-appellants is directed against the judgment and award dated 14th January 2000 in LAC No. 382/1990 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Davangere on the ground that, the enhancement made by Reference Court is inadequate.2. Land bearing Sy. No. 9/1 measuring 04 acres 07 guntas (out of 06 acres 32 guntas) situate at Mahajenahalli in Harihar Taluk was notified and acquired by the competent authority vide preliminary Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act dated 6th January 1977 for the purpose of 'construction of S.J.V.P. Hostel Building and play ground' The Land Acquisition Officer, after taking all relevant factors into consideration and other material available on record, has passed the award dated 30th July 1979 fixing the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 03,300/- per acre. Being not satisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the claimants-appellants herein along ...

K.R. Srinivasa Iyengar and ors. Vs. K. Muthuraj and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2005KAR6085; 2006(5)KarLJ247

Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. These two second appeals are filed by the plaintiffs being aggrieved by the dismissal order passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dvn,) Arsikere in RA 3/1995 and 4/1995 respectively confirming the order of the Trial Court.2. The revision petition is against the order in execution dismissing the execution petition filed by the decree holder in rent control proceedings.3. The suit property is a shop cum residential premises bearing No. 45, B H Road, Arsikere. The plaintiff is said to have taken this shop on lease along with the residential premises about 50 years back. The brother of the decree holder one Subramani is said to have mortgaged the suit property to one Bhagirathamma and then usufructuary mortgage to Siddamallappa for Rs. 5,000/- stating that he is the owner of the suit property. The said Siddamallappa filed a suit in OS 103/1971, for recovery of the amount paid to Subramani and obtained a decree for Rs. 9075/- i.e., Rs. 5000/- being the principal amount plu...

The Oriental Insurance Co. Limited Vs. Sri Purushotham T.M. and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006ACJ983; ILR2006KAR889

P. Vishwanatha Shetty, J1. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited is the appellant in this appeal. In this appeal the appellant has called in question the correctness of the judgment and award dated 21st April 2005 made in MVC No. 3696 of 2004 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal').2. Facts in brief:One Nagendra, while travelling in a private car bearing registration No. MET 9341 in front of Srinivasa Saw Mill on M.C. Road near Shivapura, Maddur at about 5.00 a.m. on 23rd December 2003 met with an accident and as a result of the said accident he died on the spot. The respondents 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimants') are the father and mother respectively of the said Nagendra. The claimants filed a claim petition before the Tribunal claiming for award of compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakh only). The claim made by the claimants was resisted by the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the Insurance Compan...

inys Medical Research Society Vs. Dir. General of Health Services

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2005(190)ELT157(Kar)

ORDERH.L. Dattu, J. 1. Petitioner is a society registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1980 ('the Act' for short). The society is engaged in the conduct of scientific research and treatment based on Naturopathy and Yoga. The petitioner - society is recognised by the Department of Scientific Research, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India, in furtherance of the research objects of the petitioner - society, it had imported medical equipments claiming benefit of exemption under Ministry of Defence (Department of Revenue) Notification No. 64/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988. In order to obtain exemption under the aforesaid notification, petitioner - society was required to obtain eligibility certificate from the Director General of Health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi. In fact, petitioner - society had applied for import of equipment. Pursuant to the request so made, eligibility certificate had been issued by the re...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vijaya Bank

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2005)199CTR(Kar)329; [2006]285ITR97(KAR); [2006]285ITR97(Karn)

ORDER1. These references are at the instance of the Revenue. Since the facts and the law involved in all the cases are same or similar, all references are disposed of by this common order.2. Facts as narrated by the Tribunal are as under :Assesses-banks filed interest-tax returns for the asst. yrs. 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 and they were accepted. Subsequently, those assessments were reopened under Section 10 of the Interest-tax Act on the ground that the assessees had failed to declare the entire interest earned on securities. A notice was issued. Assessees again filed returns of interest showing the same figure as was shown in the original returns. Assessees objected to the addition of interest on securities to chargeable interest on the ground that the interest chargeable under Interest-tax Act was only interest on loans and advances and securities do not fall within the purview of definition of 'interest' under the Interest-tax Act.Banks' contention was rejected. The en...

Dinesh Supari Traders and ors. Vs. Agricultural Produce Marketing (Reg ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2005CriLJ255; ILR2005KAR5804; 2006(6)KarLJ433

ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. Heard Sri. Jayakumar S. Patil, learned senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri B.G Sreedharan learned Counsel appearing for Respondent and perused the material on record.2. By the impugned orders, the Court below has taken cognizance of the offence punishable Under Section 114 of Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 ('Act' for short) and ordered for issuance of process/summons against the petitioners. As the common facts and questions of law are involved in these matters, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order by consent of both the Advocates.3. The petitioners in all these petitions are the licensees and market functionaries under the respondent, which is established under the provisions of Karnataka Agricultural Produces Marketing (Regulation) Act 1966 ('Act' for short) and are engaged in the business of buying and selling of notified agricultural produces in the respondent-Market Yard. As all ...

J.J.M. Medical College Vs. Director General of Health Services

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(193)ELT401(Kar)

ORDERH.L. Dattu, J. 1. Petitioner is a medical college hospital. It is engaged in both teaching medical sciences and also in providing indoor and outdoor treatment to the patients who are generally of rural background and of limited economic resources. The petitioner, for various medical diagnostic and treatment, had imported medical equipments claiming benefit of exemption under Ministry of Defence (Department of Revenue) notification No. 64/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988. In order to obtain exemption under the aforesaid notification, petitioner was required to obtain eligibility certificate from the Director General of Health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi. In fact, petitioner had applied for import of equipment. Pursuant to the request so made, eligibility certificate had been issued by the respondent authority. Using the said certificate, petitioner had imported and cleared various types of machines which are useful for diagnostic and treatment between 1-10-199...

Shriram Chits (Bangalore) Ltd. Vs. Sri Panchakshari and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR498; 2006(6)KarLJ652

ORDERN.S. Veerabhadraiah, J.1. This is the decree holder's revision being aggrieved of the order passed in Ex. Case No. 130/2000 on the file of the II Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Mangalore, dated 2-2-2001 dismissing the Execution Petition as not maintainable.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The petitioner M/s Shriram Chits (Bangalore) Ltd., Hampankatta Branch, Mangalore is a Chit Company registered under the Chit Funds Act, 1982. The subscriber viz., the principal debtor Sri Shyam Bhandary of Uppinangady was a member of the Chit Fund and drawn the chit amount on the co-obligation of respondents Sri Panchakshari and Sri M.P. Balakrishna Bhandary. The subscriber defaulted in payment of the subscription due in accordance with the terms of the chit agreement. In respect of the recovery of the dues, the petitioner initiated proceedings as provided under Chapter XII of the Chit Funds Act, 1982, before the Development Officer, Bantwal, who is the nominee for adjudication of the d...