Karnataka Court October 2007 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.
Shattuppa L. Patil S/O Late Laxman Patil Vs. Central Bank of India (a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR127]; 2008(3)KarLJ469; 2008(1)KCCR162; 2008(1)AIRKarR547
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. Petitioner, questioning the correctness of the impugned communication dated 19th March 2005 bearing No. BELG/2004-05 vide Annexure E issued by fourth respondent (stated as 'first respondent' in writ petition), has presented the instant writ petition. Further, petitioner has sought for a direction, directing the respondents to consider and to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds in the respondent - Central Bank of India forthwith.2. The grievance of petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, petitioner's father, late Sri. Laxman Patil was working as full time 'Safai karmachari' at Belgaum Branch of the first respondent - Central Bank of India (herein after called 'Bank'). While the petitioner's father was in service, he died on 4th April 2004 leaving behind the petitioner, wife and three daughters and widow mother. In the light of the scheme of the respondent - Bank for appointment of dependents of deceased employee on compassionate grounds, petiti...
Shivanna S/O Late Govindaiah Vs. the Command Area Development Authorit ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: ILR2008KAR729; 2008(3)KarLJ407:2007(6)AIRKar458; 2008(2)AIRKarR464.
Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The appellant is the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 8373/2006 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge.The appellant is an employee of the Command Area Development Authority, Cauvery Basin Project. While he was working as First Division Assistant, he was promoted to the cadre of Superintendent as per Annexure-B order dated 2.6.1997. Even though the appellant was not th the senior most First Division Assistant at that time, he was promoted to the higher cadre giving him the benefit of reservation as he is a member of the Scheduled Caste. The 2nd respondent-Narasimhaiah was the senior most First Division Assistant at that time and apparently he was overlooked in the matter of promotion on the ground that he belongs to the general category. Contending that the post of Superintendent is a single post cadre in the Command Area Development Authority, Cauvery Basin Project and hence the said post cannot be reserved, the 2nd respondent made representations to the ...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Vishwanatha Karkera
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: 2009[14]STR9; [2009]21STT213
K.L. Manjunath, J.1. This appeal is filed under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore challenging the order passed by the CESTAT, Bangalore in Appeal No. ST/26/2005. The said appeal was filed by the present appellant-the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mangalore in Appeal No. 12/2004 CE dated 21-1-2004 wherein, the appeal filed by the respondent Viswanath Karkera was allowed in part by reducing the penalty from Rs. 31,710/- to Rs. 5,000/- under Section 76 of the Act. Against the same, the appellant herein had filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short). The Tribunal has confirmed the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mangalore as per Annexure-D dated 11-11-2005.2. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties.3. According to ...
Sri Shamrao Rukamanna Talwar Vs. Smt. Suvarna by Her Pa Holder Sri Bal ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: ILR2008KAR1493; 2008(4)KarLJ735; 2008(4)KCCRSN276; 2008(3)AIRKarR1AIR2008NOC1812; 2008AIHC(NOC)690(Kar)
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. This revision petition is filed by the tenant against the concurrent finding recorded lay the Courts below that the landlady has established her requirement to occupy the schedule premises and therefore, the tenant is liable to be evicted.2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the trial Court.3. One Sri Sunthankar and brothers were owners of western half portion of CTS No. 3470 situate at Samadevi Galli, Belgaum in Karnataka. The petitioner purchased the said property under two registered sale deeds dated 11-9-1987 and 19-9-1987. Out of the said property, the premises roughly measuring 30' x 13' consisting of three rooms is in the occupation of the respondent as a tenant which is the subject matter of these proceedings and for short herein referred to as the 'schedule property', In paragraph-1 of the eviction petition, the schedule property is clearly setout and a hand sketch is also prepared and referred to in para...
Smt. M.V. Rajamma Vs. Suresh Vadakannavar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Kant41; 2008(1)KarLJ175
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This civil petition under Order 14, Rule I of CPC is by a wife who had sought for enhancement of maintenance amount before the Family Court at Mysore and who is dissatisfied with the enhancement as allowed by the Family Court.2. For the purpose of getting over that order and to get a better maintenance from the respondent, the petitioner preferred a miscellaneous first appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, but being unable to pay the Court fee of Rs. 2,400/- payable on such an appeal, the petitioner has filed this civil petition praying for permission to prosecute the appeal as an indigent person.3. Notice having been issued, respondent-husband is represented by counsel M/s. M. B. Nargund and Sona Vakkund.4. I have heard Sri Manmohan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjeev Kumar Patil, learned Counsel for the respondent.5. No more material of evidence is required to be placed before the Court to reach the conclusion that the petit...
N.Srinivasan, S/O Late K.Nagraj and ors Vs . State of Karnataka Rep by ...
Court: KARNATAKA
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: ILR2010KAR3461
YR1AC JOSEPH C.J. (Orall1. This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 15.02.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in i.A.No.2 of 2007 in Writ Petition No. 484 of 2007. The appellants are the petitioners/applicants in the writ petition.2. The appellants are Paricharakas in Sri Chamundeshwari Temple, Chamundi Hills. Mysoie. The challenge in the writ petition is against Annexure-A order dated 06.05.2006 appointing the 6th respondent as Agamika of the temple. Though the impugned appointment was made on 06.05.2006 and the 6th respondent tool; charge on 01.06.2006, the writ petition was filed only on 08.01.2007. However, an ex parte interim order was passed on 10.01.2007 staying the impugned order of appointment. Thereupon, the 6th respondent filed I.A.No.2 of 2007 praying to vacate the interim order. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the averments of the parties, the learned Single Judge disposed of I.A.No.2 of 2007 on 15.02.2007 modifying the interi...
Dr. C.S. Nagalakshmamma Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-22-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)KarLJ301; 2008(1)KCCR36; 2008(1)AIRKarR150; 2008CriLJNOC333
ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. All these criminal petitions are filed by the respective petitioners to quash the proceedings initiated in Cr. Nos. 416, 417 and 196 of 2006 of Ulsoor Gate Police Station and Crime No. 81 of 2007 of Gandhinagar Police Station, Bellary.2. The brief facts of all these cases are that, the KSRTC who is complainant in all these cases, filed complaints against this petitioners and others on the allegations that some persons made false claims against the KSRTC before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal with a mala fide intention to make unlawful gain, in collusion with the petitioners-accused and others who are Doctors, Police and Advocate, who issued false wound certificate and registered false case and claim petition though the said claimants were neither involved in the accident not sustained any injuries and the documents produced by the claimants before the MACT are all false and fabricated.Cri. P. No. 1741 of 2007:3. The facts of the case in Cri. P. No. 1741 of 2007...
Canara High School Association a Society Regd. Under Societies Registr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)KarLJ736; 2008(1)AIRKarR537; 2008LabIC(NOC)343(Kar)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition by a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, claiming the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of its choice in accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of the Constitution of India, who has questioned tile action of the educational authorities of the state of Karnataka in disapproving the appointment of lecturers in the subjects of statistics and economics, appointing petitioners 2 and 3 for the posts by the first petitioner-management in terms of the order dated 30-5-2000 [Annexure-G] passed by the director of pre-university education and order dated 23-3-2000 [Annexure-H] also passed by the very authority, apprising the petitioners that the appointments are not approved for the reason that the first petitioner-society was required to follow the policy of reservation and that in terms of the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe & Other Backward Classes (...
Sri J. Prakash Vs. Smt. M.T. Kamalamma and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Kant26; ILR2007KAR4752; 2008(2)KarLJ202
S. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. In this case, petitioner has called in question the order on I.A. No. 3 dated 18.1.2007 in O.S. No. 2305/2006 on the file of the 11th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, whereby the court below has directed the petitioner to pay necessary duty and penalty on the agreement to sell dated 8.10.2005.2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in the aforesaid suit and the respondent is the defendant. The plaintiff filed the said suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 8.10.2005 in respect of the suit schedule property and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property. The defendant has filed her written statement. During the pendency of the matter, the defendant filed I.A. No. 3 under Section 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act') read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking a direction to the plaintiff to pay duty and pe...
Smt. P. Sharadamma and anr. Vs. Sri Marithibbegowda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR5233; 2007(4)KCCRSN314.
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The respondent has filed an application I.A.I/2006 under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC, 1908, read with Section 87 of the Representation of People Act 1951, requesting the Court to reject the above election petition as the same does not disclose a cause of action. In the affidavit filed in support of the said application he has reiterated what he has stated in the statement of objections filed to the election petition.2. The petitioners have preferred this Election Petition under Section 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951, (hereinafter for short referred to as 'the Act') for a declaration that the election of respondent Sri Marithibbegowda from Karnataka South Teachers Constituency of Karnataka State to the Karnataka Legislative Council declared on 19.6.2006 as null and void and set aside the same and for other consequential reliefs.3. Petitioners contested for Legislative Council Election from Karnataka South Teachers Constituency in the election held on 17.6.20...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »