Karnataka Court June 2006 Judgments

Laxman Basappa @ Basawantappa Alebasappanavar, Major, Vs. the State of ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(4)KarLJ672

ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioners are before me challenging the order of the Land Tribunal, Dharwad dtd 30-5-1988.2. The impugned lands situated in Navalur village, Dharwad Taluk belong to the petitioners. Respondent No. 2 filed form No. 7 seeking occupancy rights before the land tribunal. Respondent No.3 did not file any application at all. The land tribunal rejected the same by its order dtd 5-9-1980 and ordered forfeiture of the lands to the Government. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners filed a writ petition in this Court. This Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the land tribunal. According to the petitioners, the land tribunal without issuing any notice, has passed the impugned order. There is divergent opinion between the members of the tribunal. In the light of constitution of the appellate authority, petitioners filed an appeal before the appellate authority. Later the appellate authority stood abolished. Civil Petition was filed in this Court and t...

Umaswamy Vs. K.N. Ramanath

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: III(2007)BC211

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The accused is manufacturer of condiments and sweet meats. The complainant was taking supplies from the accused and had given caution deposit. The contract was terminated. The accused issued cheque Ex.P.1 for Rs. 2,37,411.78 towards repayment of caution deposit. On presentation cheque is dishonoured. The intimation of dishonour is received on 23.3.1996 as per Ex.P.2. The complainant issued statutory notice and thereafter filed a private complaint.2. Per contra, the accused contends that the accounts between the complainant-accused is not settled, cheque was issued tentatively with a clear mutual understanding that the cheque should be presented only after settlement of accounts. The cheque is issued only as a security and not towards discharge of the debt or other legal liability. It is further contended that the cheque is a blank cheque and in breach of the terms, the complainant has made premature presentation of the cheque. Therefore, argued that the accused ca...

Karnataka Handloom Development Corporation Ltd. Represented by Its Man ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J. 1. The petitioner is a Government of Karnataka undertaking. It is established with the object of promoting and developing the Handloom industry. Handloom development and other Export oriented projects sanctioned by the Government of India are implemented through the petitioner. The main thrust has been to provide organisational support to weavers and to ensure their independence and self sufficiency - through the co-operation movement.2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are, that weavers avail yarn supplied from the yarn depots set up by the petitioner corporation. The weaver converts the yarn to fabric and surrenders the same at the project centres of the petitioner and obtains conversion charges from the petitioner. There is no day to day supervision. Nor is there any disciplinary control over a weaver. The weaver is free to undertake weaving work for any other person or entity. The weavers work at their will in his own premises with or without t...

S. Shashidhara Rao Vs. M. Vishwanath and ors.

Court: Karnataka

ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. The petitioner has filed a petition before the Trial Court under Section 31(1)(c) r/w Section 27(2)(a) of Karnataka Rent Act of 1999 for eviction of the tenants from the premises bearing No. 271, HMT Employees Co-operative House Building Society Ltd., situated at Mathikere layout, Bangalore-54 in Corporation ward No. 3.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased the petition schedule premises under a registered sale deed dated 15.9.1980 from HMT Employees Co-operative House Building Ltd., and he is the absolute owner of the same. Originally the father of the 1st and 2nd respondent and the husband of the 3rd respondent was tenant since 1998 and the rate of rent per month is Rs. 3,250/- Admittedly the tenancy is month to month commencing from 1st of every calendar month. On the death of original tenant-Muniswamachar, his legal representative-respondents continued to be in possession of the petition scheduled premises. They neither paid the rents no...