Karnataka Court November 2006 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.R. Patil S/O Ramachandrappa Vs. Rajeev Chandrashekar, Major and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-15-2006
Reported in: ILR2007KAR317; 2007(1)KCCR145; 2007(1)AIRKarR452; AIR2007NOC391
ORDERK.L. Manjunath, J.1. The petitioner herein who is a sitting member of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly representing Aland Constituency in Gulbarga District is calling in question the legality and correctness of the elections held on 28.3.2006 to the Council of States (Rajya Sabha). The respondents 1 to 4 are the returned candidates in the said election. The petitioner has filed this petition as a voter.2. The petitioner in this petition is requesting the court to declare the election of the returned candidates namely respondents 1 to 4 as void on the ground that (i) the respondents 1 to 4 have committed electoral offences corrupt practices under Section 123(2) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (ii) that there is an interference with the free exercise of votes and threats were held to the voters and (iii) that there is violation of Provisions of Section 128 and the rules framed under the R.P. Act. Further to declare the election of the respondents 1 to 4 as void and of no...
B. Bhadragiri Gowda Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Secretary Dept. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-15-2006
Reported in: ILR2007(1)KAR110; 2007(6)KarLJ586; 2007(2)KCCR1021; 2007(3)AIRKarR277
ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District dated 5.5.2003 dismissing the revision and confirming the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagaram sub-division, Ramanagaram dated 28.6.2002.2. It is the case of the petitioner that ME.No. 24/88-89 was effected on the basis of the Panchayat parikatha on 8.7.88 However, after the lapse of 14 years, respondents 5 to 7 who are wife and children of respondent No.8 preferred an appeal which was numbered as RA(LKP) 89/2001-02 on the file of the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagaram sub-division, Ramanagaram and the Assistant Commissioner set aside the order passed by the Tahsildar mutating the name as per ME. No. 24/88-89 and remitted the matter to the Tahsildar by order dated 28.6.2002 and being aggrieved by the same, appeal was preferred before the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Rural District, and the Deputy Commissioner in revision by order ...
D.S. Basavegowda and ors. Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-15-2006
Reported in: 2008(1)KarLJ346; ILR2007(1)Kar314; 2007(2)KCCR1046
ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mysore District, Mysore dated 20-12-2004.2. It is the case of the petitioners that they made an application to enter their names in place of respondents 4 to 8 in respect of Sy. No. 63,67,68 and 78 measuring 3 acres, 5 acres 3 guntas, 6 acres 20 guntas and 8 acres 7 guntas respectively and the Tahsildar ordered to enter the name of the applicants-petitioners. Being aggrieved by the same, appeal was preferred before the Assistant Commissioner, Hunsur Sub-Division, Hunsur and the Assistant Commissioner held that parties have to approach the Civil Court and obtain an order of declaration and accordingly, passed the order on 11 /07/2002. Being aggrieved by the same, respondents 4 to 8 preferred revision before the Deputy Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner has held that since the name of respondents 4 to 8 has already been entered in the year 1960-61 and since it is the...
Smt. Neelagangavva Vs. Joint Director of Land Records and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-15-2006
Reported in: ILR2007KAR1517
ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Joint Director of Land Records dated 12-8-2003 allowing the revision and setting aside the order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bijapur, dated 6-2-2003 and directing the petitioner herein to approach the Civil Court and work out the remedy, in accordance with law.2. It is the case of the petitioner that Sri Kallappa Kalyana Shetty had two wives Smt. Shobha and Smt. Mahananda, Smt. Shobha filed the suit for partition in O.S. No. 435 of 2000 and the said suit ended in a compromise in Lok Adalat and decree was passed on 19-2-2001 wherein the plaintiff and the defendant in the said suit being the wives of Kallappa Kalyana Shetty were allotted properties. The plaintiff in the said suit died and an application was filed by the defendant in the said suit claiming to be the wife of Kallappa Kalyana Shetty and having succeeded to the property under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession A...
The Secretary, Nagawala Grama Panchayath Vs. the President, Mysore Zil ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-15-2006
Reported in: ILR2007(1)Kar239; 2007(3)KLJ1; 2007(1)KCCR71; 2007(1)AIRKarR606(DB)
H.L. Datu, J.1. Since the parties are common in these appeals, they are clubbed, heard and disposed of by this common order.2. W.A.No. 6677/03 is filed by the Secretary. Nagawala Gram Panchayath, Nagawala, Mysore Taluk and District.W.A.No. 5936/03 is filed by one Sri B.N. Mahadeva, who was arrayed as 5th respondent in the writ petition filed by the one Sri Shankarappa in No. 35893/2001.3. In these appeals, the Secretary, Nagawala Gram Panchayath as well as Sri Mahadeva, are calling in question the correctness or otherwise of the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No. 35893/01 dated 8.7.2003 By the said order, the Learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and in that, has quashed the order passed by the Zilla Panchayat, Mysore, dated 10.9.2001, resolution dated 18.9.2001 passed by the 4th respondent-Gram Panchayat granting site and licence in favour of respondents No. 54. The facts in nutshell are, that one Sri Shankarappa claims that he is the owner of a vacant s...
H.M. Siddagangaiah S/O G. Muddahonnaiah Vs. the State of Karnataka Rep ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-14-2006
Reported in: [2007(112)FLR652]; ILR2006KAR4687; ILR2006(4)Kar4687; 2007(2)KLJ299; 2007(1)AIRKarR264
ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. The facts are that the petitioner had joined employment as a Second Division Clerk in the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and later was promoted as a Revenue Inspector Grade II and as a Revenue Inspector Grade I. He was promoted further as an Assessor and he had attained the age of superannuation in that position. It is contended by the petitioner that during 1982-83 he had worked as Revenue Inspector Grade II in the Office of the Assistant Revenue Officer, Shivajinagar Range, Bangalore. It transpires that on 1.4.1989, the Government of Karnataka directed an enquiry into certain allegations against the petitioner, namely that he was trapped by the Lokayukta while demanding and accepting illegal gratification for showing an official favour to a member of the public and the Upalokayukta was directed to conduct an enquiry against the petitioner. Accordingly it is contended by the petitioner that as on 25.11.1989 charges were framed by the Deputy Registrar, Enquiries...
The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Upper Krishna Project (Ukp) and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-14-2006
Reported in: ILR2006KAR4563ILR2006(4)Kar4563; 2007(2)KLJ332; 2007(1)KCCR99; 2007(1)AIRKarR309; AIR2007NOC268(DB).
1. This appeal arises out of an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. Nos. 21684-21697/2001 & 37510-37514/2000 dated 29.11.2001. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has quashed the order passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as 'Act') and further, has directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer to reconsider the applications filed by the petitioners under Section 28-A of the Act afresh and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.2. Respondents in the writ petitions, being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge are before us in this appeal.3. There is a delay of nearly 572 days in filing the appeal. Keeping in view the question of law involved in this appeal, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned and accordingly, the appeal is heard on merits.4. Petitioners in the writ petitions, at the first instance, we...
R. Abbaiah Reddy (Since Dead by Lrs. Sarojamma W/O R. Abbaiah Reddy, A ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-14-2006
Reported in: ILR2007KAR371; 2007(1)KarLJ412; 2007(1)KCCR429; 2007(1)AIRKarR377
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. In all these five petitions, petitioners-landlords are assailing the correctness of the order dated 27th November 2004 in HRC No. 1489/1996 (in HRRP No. 129/2005); in HRC No. 318/1997 (in HRRP No. 130/2005) and in HRC No. 320/1997 (in HRRP No. 131/2005) on the file of the II Additional Small Cause Judge, Bangalore and the order dated 2nd July 2004 passed in HRC No. 1579/1996 (in HRRP No. 623/2004) and in HRC No. 236/1997 (in HRRP No. 621/2004) on the file of the XII Additional Small Cause Judge, Bangalore.2. The petitioner - landlord now represented by his legal representatives herein, has filed an eviction petition under Section 21(1)(h) and (J) of the K.R.C. Act, 1961 and now under Section 27(2)(e) and (r) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999, against the respondents herein, in respect of the petition schedule premises called 'M. Ramaiah Reddy Lines' situated at Nanjareddy Colony, Murugesh Palya, Hamlet of Kodihalli, Varthur Hobli Bangalore-17, on the ground that, th...
The Commissioner of Income-tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income-t ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-14-2006
Reported in: (2007)208CTR(Kar)152; [2007]292ITR355(KAR); [2007]292ITR355(Karn)
1. Revenue is before this Court challenging the order dtd 26-2-2001 passed in ITA No. 1039/Bang/1998 for the assessment year 1994-95.2. Assessee carried on the business of manufacturing and sale of telecommunication cables. In respect of the assessment year 1994-95 return of income was filed by the assessee showing a total income of Rs. 8,43,81,674/- on 28-11-1994. The assessing officer in computing the relief under Section 8 of the Act. Assessee had considered only business income from Tele Cables and the assessee did not take into account the loss on account of lease business. The assessing officer concluded that the net income has to be based on the income of the manufacturing business and also the lease business in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in : [1990]181ITR79(SC) . Aggrieved by the order of the assessing authority an appeal was filed before the appellate commissioner. The appellate commissioner ruled that the assessing authority is not justified in reducing th...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Represented by Its Deputy Manager Vs. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-13-2006
Reported in: 2008ACJ23
V. Jagannathan, J.1. The appellant herein is aggrieved by the compensation awarded by the commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, to the first respondent-claimant in a sum of Rs. 2,21,370/-.2. The facts in brief are to the effect that the first respondent herein who is the mother of deceased Gopal filed an application before the commissioner for workmen's compensation, Dakshina Kannada, claiming compensation on the ground that her son deceased Gopal was working as a cleaner in a Tanker Lorry KA-20-5034 and on 7.2.2000, when the deceased was traveling in the Lorry, the vehicle was stopped near Koolur and the deceased got out of the vehicle to go to Kurikatte office to pay commission amount and thereafterwards, the deceased never returned back to the vehicle. On enquiry, the claimant came to know that the dead body of her son Gopal was found in the Panambur beach and it is her case that Gopal died while he was on duty and therefore, she sought for compensati...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »