Karnataka Court November 2006 Judgments

Sri M.C. Mohammed S/O Hassan Vs. Smt. Gowrmmma W/O Jayarama Reddy and ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2007Kant46(DB); ILR2006KAR4584; 2007(1)KarLJ378; 2007(1)KCCR125; 2007(1)AIRKarR296

1. Though the matter was posted for admission, since the contesting respondents-1 to 5 - plaintiffs had entered caveat and as the question involved in this appeal is only as to whether the termination of tenancy is valid or not, matter was taken up for disposal.2. This is the first defendant's appeal, questioning the judgment and decree dated 7th January 2006 in O.S. No. 8183/1999 on the file of the XV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore.3. Respondents-1 to 6 are the plaintiffs. As far as respondents-7 to 11 are concerned, they were the defendants-2 to 6 in the trial court and had not contested the suit.4. The suit is one for ejectment of the defendants from the suit schedule property and also for mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 500/- per day till the plaintiffs are put in possession.5. Property bearing No. 83, Bazar Street, Ulsoor, Bangalore, measuring 73 feet x 30 feet was owned by one Jayarama Reddy and after his death, the plaintiffs have succeeded to the estate as w...

Karnataka State Financial Corporation, a Body Corporate Eastablished U ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2007]139CompCas134(Kar); ILR2007KAR200; 2006(6)KarLJ703

V. Jagannathan, J.1. The appellant-KSFC, aggrieved by the dismissal of the petition filed by it under Section 31(1)(aa) of the State Financial Corporation Act ('Act' in brief) by the trial court, has come up in this appeal.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.3. The facts in brief are to the effect that the respondents No. 1 and 2 before the trial court availed a term loan and a soft loan from the appellant-corporation and accordingly a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as a term loan and Rs. 12,000/- soft loan were sanctioned. The said two respondents had also executed an agreement with a memorandum of hypothecation deed in favour of the appellant-Corporation and the third respondent herein was a guarantor for the above transaction and the borrowers committed default, in payment of the loan amount committed default in payment of the loan amount leading to the appellant taking action in the form of seizing the machineries and selling the same in the public auction and further, as the amoun...

Vikrant Tyres Limited, Now Known as J.K. Industries Limited, Represent ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007ACJ969; [2007(114)FLR527(2)]

V. Jagannathan, J.1. The appellant Vikrant Tyres Limited is aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Mysore, enhancing the compensation to the respondent-claimant, and directing the appellant to pay the compensation of Rs. 2,39,408/-. Hence, this appeal.2. I have heard the learned Counsel Sri Somashekar for the appellant and the learned Counsel Sri S.B. Mukkannappa for the respondent-claimant.3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that, it is not in dispute that the respondent sustained injuries in an accident on 17.4.2000 and the appellant got the respondent examined at CSI Holdsworth Memorial Hospital and based on the medical report received and taking note of the loss of earning capacity at 20%, as per the calculation sheet (Annexure-C), deposited a sum of Rs. 89,058/- before the Commissioner and the said amount was also withdrawn by the respondent-claimant. However, the respondent was not satisfied with the loss of earning capacity a...

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Rep. by Its Administrative Officer Vs. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: II(2007)ACC905; 2007ACJ536; 2007(4)KarLJ224

1. Since a common question of law is involved in all these appeals, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common order. At the outset, we intend to notice that these appeals are posted before us in view of the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 15.7.2004. The learned Single Judge, while referring the matter for consideration and decision of this Court has stated, that, since an important question of law is involved in these appeals, the matter requires to be considered and decided by a Division Bench of this Court.2. The appellant in these appeals is common. The respondents are different. The appellant is an Insurance Company. The respondents are the wife and children of one late Sri Mookappa in WC. No. 471/99, injured Sri. Mallikarjuna in WC.No. 343/99, Sri. Hanumanthappa in WC.No. 344/99, Sri Siddaiah in WC.No. 345/99 and Sri. Sanna Appaiah in WC.No. 346/99.3. The brief facts are:The date of accident was 5.2.1999. The vehicle that was invo...

D. Komalakshi Vs. the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2007)209CTR(Kar)70; [2007]292ITR99(KAR); [2007]292ITR99(Karn)

R. Gururajan , J.1. Both these appeals are taken up together for hearing and we pass a common order since the facts, grounds and questions of law involved in both these appeals are same or similar.2. ITA No. 768/2006 is filed by Smt D. Komalakshi and ITA No. 769/2006 is filed by Sri D. Rajkumar. They are husband and wife.3. The premises of the husband Sri D. Rajkumar was searched by the Department under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act (for short, 'the Act'). Thereafter, notices under Section 158BC of the Act were issued to the assessees namely Smt. D. Komalakshi and Sri D. Rajkumar. In response to these notices, both the appellants filed returns. Smt D. Komalakshi filed her return, declaring Rs. 19,32,838/-as total undisclosed income for the block period. As per the returns, the total tax payable was declared to be Rs. 11,82,896/-, including surcharge. In the connected appeal, the husband-Sri D. Rajkumar declared Rs. 1,07,96,536/- as total undisclosed income for the said block period...

Krishnappa Gowda S/O Late Babu Gowda Vs. the Assistant Commissioner Pu ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(1)KarLJ114; ILR2006(4)KarSN33

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The rejection of the petitioner's application in Form No. 7-A under Section 77-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, for short 'Act', by order dated 14-12-2004 of the Officer authorised, when called in question in Appeal No. 524-05/2004 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for short 'KAT), stood dismissed by order dated 15-03-2006 Annexure-'A'. Hence, this Writ petition.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner having failed to file an application in Form No. 7, for being registered as an occupant of land in question, filed Form No. 7A, for grant of the said land in support of which he produced the RTC Pahani of the said land disclosed his name as the cultivator on the appointed date, an 'accomplished fact', of a lawful tenancy. According to the learned Counsel both the Officer authorised and the KAT without considering the 'accomplished fact'', recorded a perverse finding that the land did not vest in the State under Section...

Syko Bag Industries, Proprietor, Mr. T.K. Yahoo and Mrs. K. Zubaida Vs ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(4)ARBLR452(Kar); ILR2007KAR2673; 2007(5)KarLJ229

V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. The order impugned in this Appeal passed by the District Judge, Udupi dated 27/11/2002 in AS. No. 98/2002, on the question of jurisdiction of the said court after interpretation of Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (hereinafter called as 'the Act' in short) made by the learned Judge, has returned the petition to the appellants herein for presenting the same before the jurisdictional court by granting time till 12/12/2002 to facilitate the Appellants to name the court to which they propose to present the same is questioned before this Court inter alia contending that the learned District Judge has wrongly applied Section 16(c) of CPC ignoring the relevant fact, of dispute between the parties involved in the arbitration proceedings, which is in relation to the loan transaction and not a suit for foreclosure of the immovable properly of the first appellant which is furnished as collateral security to the respondent. The sale of redemption o...

Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Dasara Honnuraswa ...

Court: Karnataka

V. Jagannathan, J.1. All these appeals arise out of one and the common order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Bellary and appellant herein, viz., New India Assurance Co. Ltd., is aggrieved by the said order insofar fixing the liability on appellant insurance company to pay the compensation to the claimants in respect of whom the common order was passed.2. Heard Mr. Rajagopalan, the learned Counsel for appellant and Mr. Lakshmikant Reddy, learned Counsel for respondents-claimants. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 and the respondent No. 3 remained absent.3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the accident in question is not in dispute and so also the fact of 60 odd persons have been found travelling in the vehicle in question and being injured when the accident occurred at about 9 a.m. on 10.11.1997. However, the main contention is that appellant insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation because, the policy in respect of the vehicle ...

The Deputy Regional Director, Esi Corporation and the Manager, Esi Cor ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(2)KarLJ66

ORDERV. Jagannathan, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The appellant namely the Deputy Regional Director or ESI Corporation, Bangalore, is aggrieved by the order passed by the ESI Court, inasmuch as the application filed by the respondent herein under Section 75 of the Employees State insurance Act (for short 'The ESI Act') questioning the order passed by the appellant dated 7.3.1995 came to be allowed and the ESI Court took the view that the respondent hotel namely 'Hotel Vijay' cannot be covered under the ESI Act, because, there is no functional integrality between 'Hotel Vijay' and 'Vijay Restaurant'.2. The learned Counsel for the appellant Sri. V. Narasimha Holla, submitted that it is the specific case of the appellant that 'Vijay Restaurant' is a part and parcel of the respondent establishment i.e. 'Hotel Vijay' and if they are treated as one unit, the coverage under the ESI Act becomes inevitable and therefore the order was passed on the basis of the report of the...

M.A. Parthasarathy S/O Late M.A. Srinivasan Vs. Bank of Baroda Rep. by ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2007]138CompCas791(Kar); 2007(1)KarLJ200; 2007(1)KCCR417; 2007(1)AIRKarR340; AIR2007NOC311

D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This appeal by the 1st defendant in OS No. 4307/1987 is directed against the Judgment & Decree dated 7-7-2000 where under the court below has partly decreed the suit of the plaintiff-Bank of Baroda and while so decreeing the suit for principal amount of Rs. 73.200/-, has allowed interest at the rate of 15% per annum on this amount from 1-12-1985 onwards till the satisfaction of the decree and further directed that the plaintiff-Bank should first proceed against the 1st defendant for realisation of the decreetal amount.2. It is aggrieved by this Judgment and Decree, the appeal by the 1st defendant on several grounds, inter alia, that the 1st defendant, in fact, was not liable for payment of any money to the Bank; that having regard to the subsequent developments and particularly the conduct of the parties including the Bank, the 1st defendant had been absolved of his liability if any; that the Judgment & Decree if at all should have been only as against the 2n...