Karnataka Court October 2006 Judgments

The Sangli Bank Ltd., a Banking Company Estd. Under Indian Companies A ...

Court: Karnataka

Ram Mohan Reddy, J.1. The Sangli Bank Limited, the appellant in all these appeals, aggrieved by the common Judgment dated 19.6.2004 of the District Judge, Bagalkot in LAC Appeal Nos. 268 to 288 of 2001, confirming the common order dated 27.5.2000 of the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Jamkhandi, dismissing LAC Nos. 2111 to 2131 of 1998, has presented these appeals.2. The panorama of the factual position is:A) The State Government issued a notification in the year 1984 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for acquisition of large tracts of land including the lands and buildings of the first respondent in each of these appeals hereinafter referred to as 'loaners', on account of their submergence in the Upper Krishna Project. The loaners', allegedly, through their advocate by name M.S. Biradar Patil (Budihal) are said to have applied for and secured loans varying from Rs. 3,500/- Rs. 5000/- towards initial expenses for shifting to the new rehabilitation centre proposed to be ...

S. Kumar Vs. Regional Director, Esi Corporation, State Insurance Corpo ...

Court: Karnataka

V. Jagannathan, J.1. Though this matter is posted for admission, by consent, of the learned Counsel for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.2. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the E.S.I. Court rejecting the prayer of the appellant to take the percentage of loss of earning capacity at 30% and not 20% and the main contention put forward by the appellant, as could be seen from the grounds of appeal, is that the neither E.S.I. Court, nor the Medical Appellate Tribunal could have disregarded the percentage of loss of earning capacity as mentioned in the second schedule to the E.S.I. Act and, therefore, the E.S.I. Court could not have taken into account a lesser percentage than the one mentioned in the second schedule in respect of the nature of the injuries caused to the appellant.3. The learned Counsel for the appellant, relying on the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of E.S.I. Corporation v. Ameer Hasan, submitted that in the instant cas...

Hotel Leelaventure Limited a Company Incorporated Under the Companies ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(2)KarLJ34

ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for short hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', for appointment of arbitrator, in view of the arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties dated 31st January, 2003.2. The petitioner owns The Leela Palace Kempinski, which is a Five-Star Deluxe Hotel situated at Airport Road, Bangalore. The petitioner also owns a shopping plaza which forms an integral part of the said Hotel and it is called 'The Leela Galleria'. The respondent under a Licence Agreement dated 31st January 2003 has taken an area of 4236 sq. feet in the said Leela Galleria. Annexure-B is the original agreement. According to the petitioner, the period agreed came to an end by 17th March 2006. Therefore, they addressed a letter dated 19th January, 2006 calling upon the respondent to vacate and deliver the vacant possession of the property. When the respondents did not comply with the said demand, they were con...

Miss. Saroja Bhatija Vs. Sanjaya B. Makhija and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007KAR114; 2007(1)KarLJ243; 2007(2)KCCR1035; 2007(1)AIRKarR286; AIR2007NOC265; 2007(3)CivilLJ233

ORDERK.L. Manjunath, J.1. Petitioner herein has filed three suits. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. 331/1996 and O.S. 7251/1995 before the City Civil Judge, Bangalore. Subsequently, respondent Pushpa Makhija has also filed a suit for partition and separate possession in O.S. No. 1936/2003. O.S. No. 331/1996 was pending before CCH-6, O.S. No. 7251/ 1995 was pending before CCH-14 and the suit filed by the respondent Pushpa Makhija was pending before CCH-32. Plaintiff in O.S. 1936/ 2003 and defendants in O.S. 331/1996 and 7251/1995 filed three Misc. Petitions under Section 24 of CPC before the Prl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore in Misc. Nos. 510,511 & 512/2004 requesting the Court to transfer all the suits to one Court and to try the same along with O.S. 7251/1995. Misc. Petition filed under Section 24 of CPC before the Prl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore in Misc. No. 510,511 and 512/2004 requesting the Court to transfer all the suits to one Court and to try the same along with O.S. 7251/19...

Ramadurga Dyavamma Alias R. Devamma Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(3)KarLJ120;

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bellary, wherein the revision has been allowed and the order effecting phodi in respect of Sy. No. 279/B as 279/B1, 279/B2 and 279/B3 is cancelled and the main contention of the petitioner in this writ petition is that, no notice was issued to the petitioner in respect of the proceedings before the Deputy Director of Land Records and there was delay of about 30 years in filing the revision petition before the Deputy Director of Land Records as phodi was done in respect of Sy. No. 279/B (Bl, B2 and B3) by order passed in 1970 and application has been filed for condonation of delay as per Annexure-D to the writ petition and Deputy Director of Land Records without considering the application for condoning the delay has disposed of the revision on merits and therefore the order is liable to be set aside.2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petiti...

S.K. Vijayakumar S/O Lt. S.N. Krishnakumar Vs. S.K. Ravikumar S/O Lt. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR4611; 2007(1)KarLJ446; 2007(1)AIRKarR431; AIR2007NOC709(DB)

1. These three Miscellaneous First Appeals and the Civil Revision Petition are filed against the order dated 12.3.2001 passed by the District Court, Bangalore Rural District, in Arbitration Case No. 1/2001. The District Court dismissed the petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the interlocutory applications. The applications are, I.A.I filed under Section 9(ii)(d) of the Act read with Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 C.P.C for injunction, I.A.II under Order 26 Rules 9 & 11 CPC for appointment of Commissioner, I.A.III under Order -10 Rule I CPC for appointment of Receiver and I.A.IV under Section 151 CPC to dismiss the petition as not maintainable.2. The brief facts leading to these matters are the Appellant in the appeals and petitioner in the revision petition entered into a partnership venture under the name arid style of M/s. Srinivasa Enterprises along with respondents 1 to 6. The partnership firm was running Gopal T...

B. Somanatha Rao, Dead by LR. B. Vishwanath Rao S/o Late B. Seetharama ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007(2)KarSN24; 2007(3)KCCR1643; 2007(3)AIRKarR463

ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the deceased Somanath son of V. Seetharama Rao to quash the order dated 18.8.98 passed by the Addl. Land Tribunal Bantwal in Case Nos. TNC. 7019/74-75, 7000/74-75 and 8590/74-75 ordering registration of land measuring 2 acres 76 cents in survey No. 44/1B2B2 of Bantwal Mooda village whereby the Tribunal granted occupancy right in favour of deceased first respondent-1 to 3.2. The case of the petitioners in brief are that the deceased petitioner was the owner of the land bearing survey No. 44/1B2B measuring 2 acre 72 cents of Bantwal Muda village and he was in possession and enjoyment of the same and the said land is dry land containing karee mara tree growth raised. Those trees were reared and preserved by the deceased petitioner and it is not used for any agricultural purpose. Therefore, the provisions of Karnataka Land Reforms Act does not apply as the land in question is not fit for cultivation. At no point of time the deceased resp...

Neelakanthappa S/O Shivappa Asuti Vs. the State of Karnataka Rep by It ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR4259; 2007(1)KarLJ235

1. The Petitioner has sought for quashing the election notice dated 20.09.2006 vide Annexure-C issued by the respondent No. 2 and also for striking down Section 2(d-1) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act' for short) on the ground that the same violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioner herein was elected as President to the Dharwad Co-operative Milk Union ('union' for short), Dharwad for a period of two and half (2 1/2 ) years on 14.10.2004. According to petitioner, his term of 2 1/2 years comes to an end by 13.04.2007 as per English Calendar. Hence, he has filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of the election notice issued by the respondent No. 2 vide Annexure-C. by which, the election are scheduled to be held on 29.09.2006.3. Sub-section (5) of Section 29-F of the 'Act' makes it amply clear that the President shall hold office for a term of two and half years. The word 'year' is defined in Section 2(d-1...

Saraswathi Electronics Vs. the Income Tax Officer

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2007)207CTR(Kar)207

R. Gururajan, J.1. M/s. Saraswathi Electronics, Hassan, is before us in this appeal.2. The appellant-assesses is a regular income tax assessee. He has filed returns for the assessment years 1991-92 to 1994-95 simultaneously along with the audit report on 25-7-1995. Though the audit reports were obtained belatedly, they were enclosed along with the returns of income for the relevant years. The Assessing Authority noticing the income of more than Rs. 40 lakhs has chosen to initiate proceedings in terms of the Income Tax Act (for short, 'the Act'). Thereafter, penalty proceedings were initiated. The appellant was heard and penalty was levied. The same was challenged unsuccessfully both before the Appellant Commissioner and the Tribunal. The assessee having lost at all levels is before us by raising the following questions of law for our consideration:(1) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that penalty under Section 271B of the Act was exigible for the belated audit reports unde...

S. Parameshwarappa S/O Late Sannasiddegowda and P. Ratna W/O S. Parame ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: III(2007)BC752; [2007]135CompCas123(Kar); 2007CriLJ586; 2007(2)KarLJ19

ORDERH.V.G. Ramesh, J.1. This revision is against the order of dismissal of the criminal appeal filed by the petitioners in No. 65/03 by the IX Addl. Sessions Judge, Bangalore City by order dated 28.6.2003.2. A complaint was filed by the respondent before the XV Addl, CMM, Bangalore under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act which was registered in CC 20134/1999. These petitioners are arrayed as accused 2 and 7. Accused 1 is the company by name Saroj Mining Ltd., Bangalore. The 1st petitioner is the Chairman and the 2nd petitioner is the Director and it is alleged that accused have borrowed loan from the complainant in a sum of Rs. 18.5 lakhs. There was also a resolution passed by the accused to clear the amount due to the complainant. The 3rd accused being the Managing Director of the accused-company, on the basis of the resolution, had issued a cheque for Rs. 20 lakhs in favour of the complainant On presentation, the said cheque came to be dishonoured for 'insufficient funds...