Karnataka Court August 2006 Judgments

Monappa Kottari S/O Late Korega Kottari, Major (Since Deceased by His ...

Court: Karnataka

Mohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. The Legal Representatives of the first defendant in OS No. 868/1990 have filed this second appeal.2. The first respondent herein was the plaintiff and the second respondent herein was the second defendant in the said suit. Defendant No. 2 is the mother, of Plaintiff. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that he and second defendant have got subsisting Sub Moolageni & moolageni rights respectively and that these pre-existing rights are not extinguished by the act of first defendant purchasing the rights of Moolgar, He has also sought for a decree for future means profits and other incidental reliefs. The Trial Court decreed the suit and the first appellate Court confirmed the same.3. Certain undisputed facts of the case are as under:One Anthu Hengsu was the owner and Moolgar of the property in question which is a residential house with backyard. Earlier the property was situated in village limits. Presently, the house and the land are within city limits ...

Smt. Shanthamma W/O Sri Arunachalam Vs. Sub-inspector of Police, Malur ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(3)KarLJ330

ORDER1. This case is to be an eye opener to the Police Department in the matter of conducting proceedings in the highest Court of the State. One Smt. Shanthamma moved this Court by way of a habeaus corpus petition on 28.6.2006 in W.P.No. 62/2006(HC). According to her, the Sub Inspector of Police, Indira Nagar arrested the petitioner's son on 23.6.2006 at around 12.45 in the mid-night, while he was sleeping in the petitioner's house. On 24.6.2006, she went to Malur Police Station and made enquiries with regard to the whereabouts of her son. She was told that her son was not arrested. Thereafter, after search and enquiry, she came to know that her son is in the custody of Indira Nagar Police Station on 28.6.2006. Immediately, she moved this Habeaus Corpus petition in this Court. This Court noticed the submission of Sri. Manjunath, learned Counsel that the detenue is in Indira Nagar Police Station, according to his instructions and that the Police are not relieving the detenue on the grou...

S. Vishwanath S/o late K. Shammanna Vs. Central Bank of India, A body ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2007(115)FLR39]; ILR2007(2)Kar1821; 2007(3)KLJ559; 2007(2)KCCR1497; 2007(3)AIRKarR185(DB)

Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The appellant was a Manager in the Central Bank of India. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and a punishment of removal from service was imposed on him by order dated 26.9.1987 passed by the fourth respondent -Chairman and Managing Director, Central Bank of India. The said order dated 26.9.1987 was challenged by the appellant in Writ Petition No. 235/1993 which was disposed of by a learned single Judge of this Court as per Annexure-'B' judgment dated 11.6.2001. As per Annexure-'B' judgment, the impugned order of the fourth respondent was set aside and a direction was issued to the respondent-Bank to reinstate the petitioner into service with all monetary and service benefits except for the period from the date of dismissal till he approached the Court Liberty was reserved to the management of the respondent-Bank to proceed with the enquiry, if they so desired, from the stage the defects were noticed by the Court The respondent-Bank filed Writ App...

Govinda Devadiga S/O Subba Devadiga Vs. the State of Karnataka Rep. by ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. Petitioner's application in form No. 7 under Section 48A(1) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, for short Act, for being registered as occupant of 1 acre of land in S. No. 12/13A of Kote village, Udupi Taluk and District was partly allowed by order dated 23-9-1981 Annexure 'B' of the Land Tribunal conferring occupancy rights over 77 cents of land, which when called in question in a writ proceedings instituted by the landlord, was quashed and the proceeding remitted for consideration afresh over the extent of 77 cents. On remand, the Land Tribunal held an enquiry, considered the material on record including the evidence both oral and documentary and concluded that the land in question was not tenanted and that the petitioner was not a lawful tenant of the said land as on the appointed date and accordingly rejected the claim of the petitioner by the order dated 28.10.1998, Annexure 'A'. Hence this writ petition.2. The petition is opposed by filing statemen...

Yallappa, Adopted Father Basavannappa Vs. Durgappa S/O Rudrapa Kali

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR4654; 2007(1)KLJ574; 2007(1)AIRKarR146

Ajit J. Gunjal, J.1. The plaintiff-respondent has filed a suit for enforcement of an agreement dated 07.04.1986. The learned Trial Judge decreed the suit and the same has been confirmed by the learned Appellate Judge. Hence, the second appeal.2. During the course of this judgment, the parties would be referred to as per their ranking in the Trial Court.3. The facts leading to filing of the second appeal can be summarised as follows:It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property and he had agreed to sell the same for a sum of Rs. 25,000/-. The defendant agreed to sell the land on 07.04.1986 after receiving earnest money of Rs. 7,100/- and has executed a document. The said document IB dated 07.04.1986 and the said document was executed by the defendant in front of the witnesses. It is the case of the plaintiff that the balance amount of Rs. 17,900/- was required to be paid at the time of execution of the regular sale deed and the ex...

Smt. Narasamma W/O Late Verikataswamy Raju Vs. Sri Nirannanilatha Momm ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(2)KLJ427; 2007(1)KCCRSN15; 2007(1)AIRKarR219; AIR2007NOC263(DB)

1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 19th March, 2005 in O.S. 1020/1995 on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge Sr.Dn.) Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore.2. The case of the plaintiff is that, she entered into a contract of sale on 31.3.1995 with the defendant in respect of the land measuring 1 acre 30 guntas in Sy. No. 1 of Nalluruhalli Village Krishnarajapuram hobli, Bangalore for consideration of Rs. 16 lakhs per acre. On the date of agreement, a sum of Rs. 5,60,000/- was paid towards advance and a further amount of Rs. 5 lakhs was paid on 10.6.1995. In all the plaintiff had paid Rs. 10,60,000/- to the defendant under the agreement. The defendant was required to obtain necessary clearance from the income tax authorities and also no objection from the appropriate authority under the provisions of Income Tax Act and the Rules made thereunder in order to finalise and complete the sale transaction.3. It is further averred by the plaintiff, tha...

State of Karnataka by Jalahalli Police Station Vs. Joseph Rodrigues S/ ...

Court: Karnataka

1. In this nation where great tradition and culture exists, where right from ancient times, it is stated l= iwT;ars ukjh jears r= nsor A (where woman is given respect, only in that place God resides) yet another brutal inhuman attack with acid on a young girl of hardly 20 years of age, has given rise to the present appeals.2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and sentence dated 6.5.2005 holding the accused guilty of the offence under Section 326 of IPC, and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 5 years and 3 months with a fine, the accused has filed Criminal Appeal No. 1239/2004, whereas the State aggrieved by acquittal of the accused for offence under Section 307 of IPC, has filed Criminal Appeal 1065/2004. The State has also filed Criminal Appeal No. 1066/2004 under Section 377 of Cr.P.C, praying for enhancement of the sentence under Section 326 of IPC. on the ground that the sentence is inadequate. Since we have to consider same evidence and same judgment to decide these three appeals, a...

P. Gopal Raju, Prop. Global Engg. Works Vs. the Secretary, Government ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR3523

1. The appellant is before this Court calling in question the order dated 1.9.2003 passed by the VI Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore city in Arbitration suit No. 5/2001. By the said judgment and order, the learned City Civil Judge has dismissed the petition filed by the appellant herein questioning the award dated 17.10.2000 passed by the Arbitrator.2. The facts leading to the same are:The Executive Engineer BCD II, CPWD i.e., the second respondent herein after finalising the tender process entrusted to the appellant, the work of construction of hundred bedded hostel under phase II including internal water supply, sanitary and drainage at a cost of Rs. 30,50,660/- under the agreement No. 82/BCD II/1989-90. The date of commencement of the work was indicated as 4.12.1989 and the work was to be completed within the stipulated period of 12 months. The work was however completed only on 30.6.1993. According to the appellant, the delay was attributable to respondent No. 2 and as such the se...

B.K. Sreenivas Murthy S/O Kumbanna Vs. North West Karnataka State Road ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2008KAR2502; 2008(4)KCCRSN311; 2008(4)AIRKarR100; 2008LabIC(NOC)932(Kar)(DB)

Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. This writ appeal is filed against the judgment dated 12.09.2005 in writ petition No. 38261 of 2002 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The appellant is the petitioner in the writ petition.2. In response to the notification issued by the 1st respondent inviting applications for the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Typist, the appellant submitted his application. The selection to the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Typist was based on the percentage of marks obtained by the candidates in the qualifying examination. The candidates were directed to appear for interview along with the certificates including the certificates relating to the qualifying examination. The interview was fixed on 16.09.2002. The selection was finalised on the same date.3. The appellant claims to have received the letter for interview only on 18.09.2002 and hence could not appeal for the interview. Consequently, he was not considered for selection and was not included in the list of sele...

M. Puttamadaiah S/O Puttamadaiah Vs. the General Manager (Hrd), Karnat ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition by a person who was an employee of the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd., which was earlier known as Karantaka Electricity Board and before that Mysore State Electricity Board, in its previous awatars.2. Petitioner retired from service with effect from 31-10-1999, after having served for about 28 years, having joined service on 22-5-1971. The petitioner is drawing pension computed on the basis of the services in the Board/Corporation for this period of service. The petitioner in fact had claimed for taking into consideration the erstwhile services the petitioner had rendered in the judicial department with effect from 18-10-1969 to 21-5-1971, as a period which qualifies for computing pension, as it was the case of the petitioner that the petitioner having worked in government department during that period, it should be taken as qualifying service in terms of Regulation 182(A) of the Karnataka State Electricity Board Employees Se...