Karnataka Court October 2006 Judgments

Beerappa S/O Yallappa Bandrolli Vs. Fakirappa Beerappa Bandrolli and o ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR4170; 2007(1)KarLJ477

Subhash B. Adi, J1. This is an appeal by plaintiff No. 2, questioning the judgment and decree dated 21.9.2005 in O.S. No. 108/2002 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Saundatti.2. The suit is one for partition and separate possession. Case of the plaintiff is that, Fakirappa, son of Gadigeppa Bandrolli and Smt. Mayawwa, daughter of one Kanappa Mangasuli were the original preposit us for both the families of plaintiffs and defendants-1 to 3. Fakirappa had two sons namely, Beerappa and Yallappa. Defendants-1 to 3 are the children of Beerappa. Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife of Yellappa, plaintiff No. 2 is the son. Original propositus Fakirappa died in the year 1927 leaving behind Beerappa and Yellappa. Beerappa died in the year 1946 at Saundatti. His wife also died subsequently. Defendant No. 1 is the son of Beerappa, Defendants-2 and 3 are daughters. Second son of Fakirappa namely, Yellappa also died in the year 1989 leaving behind first plaintiff Smt. Dyamawwa, the wife and Beerappa,...

Employees State Insurance Corporation Represented by the Deputy Direct ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2007(112)FLR574]; ILR2006KAR4695; 2007(3)KarLJ277; (2007)2LLJ448Kant

V. Jagannathan, J.1. In this appeal, the Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) has questioned the legality of the order passed by the ESI Court, Mangalore in setting-aside the orders passed under Section 45A of the Act.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.3. Learned Counsel Smt. Geetha devi appearing for the Corporation submitted that in respect of the two orders under Section 45A of the Act, the respondent establishment took up the matter before the ESI Court by filing an application, under Section 75 of the ESI Act and the ESI Court after examining the material on record came to the conclusion that insofar as the contribution demanded by the appellant concerning the employment of security guards is concerned, there is evidence to the effect that the contributions have been paid towards the security guards and as such once again, directing the principal employer i,.e, the respondent herein to pay the contribution on the employment of three security guards will no...

D. Selvaraj Vs. State

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(1)AIRKarR104; 2007CriLJ909

ORDERV.G. Ramesh, J.1. This revision is filed against the order of the Addl. District Judge/Fast Track Judge IIIrd, Bangalore Rural District in Crl. A. 61/2005.2. The petitioner was charge-sheeted by the Attibele Police before the JMFC, Anekal for the offences under Sections 279, 338 and 304-A, I.P.C. alleging that on 8-1-2003, around 3.45 p.m. in front of Chikkanahalli Road near Attibele Checkpost when C.W. 1 along with his friend Shanker was going on a motor cycle bearing No. KA 05 FA 7485 from Bangalore towards Hosur on NH 7, the petitioner being the driver of Bus bearing No. TN 27 N 1387 coming from Hosur towards Bangalore on the wrong side at great speed in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life, dashed against the motor cycle due to which C.W. 1 sustained grievous injuries and the pillion rider who also sustained grievous injuries succumbed to the same on the spot. The learned Magistrate on filing of the charge-sheet, after recording the plea of the accused and ...

Appumurthy @ Appu S/O Shankar Vs. State by K.G. Hall

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007(1)Kar879; 2007(3)KLJ454; 2007(2)KCCRSN56; 2007(1)AIRKarR471(DB)

1. This appeal is by the sole accused being aggrieved of the Judgment passed in S.C. No. 97/01 by the III Addl. Sessions Judge, Bangalore city dated 21.6.2003 convicting the accused for the offence under Section 498-A and 302 Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence under Section 498A and further sentencing to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the offence under Section 302 IPC.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:An young girl Smt. Vadivu @ Vadivukarasi was just married with the accused, three months prior to the incident was done to death by causing burns by her husband Appu @ Appumurthy. The accused Appu was residing with his wife Vadivu at Samdhananagar, was alleged to have addicted to alcohol subjecting the deceased to cruelty and harassment in the thrust of sex by asking her to give a child. On 24.9.2000, the deceased having prepared food at about 8 p.m. called he...

Karnataka Leasing and Commercial Corpn. Ltd. (In Liquidation) Vs. N.R. ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This application has been filed under Section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the 'Act') read with Rule 9 of the Company (Court) Rules, 1959, seeking for recovery of Rs. 5,29,947 together with contractual rate of interest at 21 per cent per annum monthly compounded from 1-9-1996 till the date of payment and for costs.2. It is averred in the application that the applicant-company is ordered to be wound up by order dated 29/31-10-1996 passed by this Court in Company Petition No. 43/1992. The respondent herein was having commercial dealing with the applicant-company and he was granted loan of Rs. 1,60,020 and he has executed the promissory note on 20-7-1989 agreeing to repay the said amount along with interest at 21 per cent per annum and the said amount has not been repaid and wherefore, the application for recovery of the amount.3. The respondent has filed objections statement denying the averments made in the application and contending ...

B. Chandrashekar Vs. T.L. Anand Kumar

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007KAR4634; 2007(1)KarLJ250; 2007(1)AIRKarR322

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This writ Petition is filed being aggrieved by the order dated 9.10.2006 wherein the application filed by the respondent for amendment of the eviction petition filed under Section 27(2)(m)(q) and (r) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 to include the additional prayer for eviction under Section 31(c) and 45 of the Act as the respondent has become a senior citizen during the pendency of the petition, has been allowed.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The learned Counsel submitted that the provisions of order VI Rule 17 only provides for amendment of the pleadings and not the amendment of law and further submitted that if the petition is filed under Section 31(c) of the Act claiming the benefit of senior citizen, the provisions of Section 45 of the Act would not be applicable and the order has been passed under Section 45 of the Act and having taken the advantage of the said provisions, the petitioner cannot invoke the provisions of Section 31 o...

Sri R. Narayanaswamy Reddy S/O Late Ramaiah Reddy Vs. Sri R. Lakshmina ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(1)KLJ654; 2007(1)AIRKarR119

V. Jagannathan, J.1. With the consent of the parties, this matter is taken up for final disposal though it is listed for orders.2. The appellant herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No. 5999/2005 on the file of the learned Addl. Civil Judge, Bangalore, and I.A.No. 1 filed by him in the said suit praying for an injunction against the respondents herein came to be rejected by the trial court giving rise to this appeal.3. I have heard the submissions made by Sri S.K.V. Chalapathi, the learned Counsel for the appellant, Sri Udaya Holla, learned senior counsel for R-1 and R-2, and Sri Suraj Govinda Raj, learned Counsel for R-4. The submission of the appellant's counsel is that the appellant filed the present suit for partition of the suit schedule property measuring 1 acre 3 guntas in S.No. 29/2A of Jaraganahalli Village and it is his case that he and R-1 and R-2, being the sons of late Ramaiah Reddy, he is entitled to his share in the suit, schedule property. Therefore, he filed the said suit an...

Dr. Y. Raghuramulu S/O Shri. Y. Gowrappa Vs. Coffee Board, Represented ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. The petitioner contends that he holds a M.Sc (Ag) degree from the University of Agricultural Sciences and that he holds a Doctorate Degree - Ph.d (Horticulture) from the same university.That he has an excellent academic record and has many achievements to his credit.2. The petitioner was selected and appointed as Assistant Agronomist in the first respondent Board in the year 1987 and as an Agronomist in the year 1990. He was promoted as Divisional Head of Agronomy. He has been discharging duties in the said post and as Coffee Scientist (FAO Project).3. It is contended that the post of Director, Coffee Research Institute had fallen vacant as on 30.6.2004. The respondent Board had invited applications, in the prescribed form, to the post and the notification was published in an English daily newspaper. The last date for receipt of application was indicated as 30.1.2004. The minimum qualification prescribed was a Doctorate Degree in any branch of Agricultural or...

B. Krishnappa, S/O Late Bommaraje Gowda Vs. Smt. ChandrikA. G. D/O T. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR4704; 2007(1)KarLJ468; ILR2006(4)Kar4704; 2007(1)KLJ468; 2007(3)KCCR1689; 2007(1)AIRKarR150

ORDERJawad Rahim, J.1. This revision under Section 18 of the Small Causes Courts Act, 1964, is directed against the order passed by the learned Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore in S.C. No. 357/2003, dated 17-12-2003, returning the plaint for presentation before the proper court on the basis that Small Causes Court had no pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit as brought.2. The plaintiff aggrieved by the said order is in revision. In response to the notice in this revision the respondent has entered appearance.3. Factual matrix manifest from the records reveals;The plaintiff filed a suit seeking for a decree to eject the defendant from the schedule premises on the plea that after marriage between him and the defendant they resided together as husband and wife in the premises No. 56, 'KRISHNA NIVAS', 5TH Cross, 12th Matn, Raghavandra Block, Srinagar, Bangalore, which property he owns. The matrimony between them was not a smooth sail and it resulted in initiation of proceedin...

Doddarangamma W/O Ningegowda Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(1)KLJ667; 2007(1)AIRKarR210

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This Writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hassan District, Hassan, dated 24.05.2004 in case No. RA/148/2002-2003 confirming the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Hassan Sub-Division, Hassan dated 24.10.2002 in case No. RA.102:99-2000, wherein it is ordered that the name of the fifth respondent shall be entered in the record of rights in respect of 02 Acres of land in Sy. No. 351, totally measuring 04 Acres 15 Guntas situate in Bagu Village, C.R, Patna Taluk, Hassan District.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the land comprised in the said Sy. No. 351 measuring 04 Acres 15 Guntas belonged to Boralingegowda, who died intestate leaving behind his wife Smt. Nanjamma and two daughters namely, Smt. Doddarangamma - writ petitioner and Smt. Sannarangamma, Nanjamma died in the year 1993. Petitioner along with her younger sister Smt. Sannarangamma succeeded to the property of Boralingegowda as his successo...