Skip to content

Karnataka Court December 2007 Judgments

Dec 14 2007

Kunal Pathak S/O Late Sanjeev Pathak Vs. Vijaya Bank, a Body Constitut ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-14-2007

Reported in: [2008(117)FLR299]; ILR2008KAR1061; 2008(3)KarLJ573; 2008(1)KCCR349; 2008(2)AIRKarR47; 2008LabIC(NOC)420(Kar)

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner, assailing the correctness of the impugned communication dated 31.10.94 vide Annexure-B, in so far as it states that, keeping open the offer of appointment is subject to fulfilling the terms and conditions of the scheme prevailing on the said date; the communication dated 17.9.2005 vide Annexure-H and the communication dated 24.12.2005 vide Annexure-K all issued by the respondent/bank has presented this writ petition. Further, petitioner has sought to direct the respondent/bank to appoint the petitioner in clerical cadre on compassionate grounds in accordance with the Scheme as notified by Codified Circular No. 29/93 dated 27.3.93 vide Annexure-A.2. The case of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, petitioner is the son of deceased Sri, Sanjeev Pathak, who was the employee of the respondent-Bank and who died while he was in service in the accident on 14th April 1994, leaving behind the petitioner as his only legal representative since...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 2007

Peerless General Finance and Investment Company Ltd. Rep. by Its Regio ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-14-2007

Reported in: (2008)ILLJ935Kant

A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.1. The respondent was a workman under the appellant. On the allegation that while in employment, Rs. 12,600/-belonging to the appellant was misappropriated by the acts of forgery of the field staff and other executives, respondent was issued with a charge sheet dated August 19, 1988 by the appellant, to which, he has submitted a reply dated September 25, 1988. The appellant ordered for holding of a disciplinary enquiry and an enquiry officer was appointed by the appellant on July 27, 1989, to enquire into the allegations of misconduct, which was the subject matter of the charge sheet dated August 19, 1988. Based on the report of the enquiry officer, the respondent having been found to be guilty of the charge levelled against him, he was dismissed from service by an order dated August 16, 1989. An appeal having been preferred by the respondent, the appellate authority by its order dated September 28, 1989, has rejected the appeal. Respondent thereafter filed an ...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 2007

Mosaic Industires Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by Its Director M. Sadashiv Rao Vs. E ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-14-2007

Reported in: [2008(118)FLR182]; ILR2008KAR988; 2008(3)KarLJ462; (2008)IIILLJ436Kant; ILR2008(1)Kar988; 2008(3)KLJ462; 2008(2)KCCRSN167; 2008(2)AIRKarR400; 2008LabIC2067(Kar)

1. Though the matter appears for admission, by consent of both parties, heard on merits and disposed of.2. It is not in dispute that the appellant establishment is covered under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, (for short, 'the ESI Act'.) The dispute pertains to claim of interest on the omitted wages for the period between 1979 to 1983. According to the Corporation the omitted wages were Rs. 1,63,600/- for the above said period and in the year 1988 when the officers of the Corporation inspected and verified the accounts determined that Rs. 1,63,600/- were omitted wages which were not taken into account as contributions to be made by the appellant establishment. When orders came to be passed under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, Application No. 13/88 came to be filed by the appellant before the ESI Court which stayed the orders under Section 45-A. Subsequently, upon constitution of the ESI Court at Mangalore, the matter was transferred to ESI Court at Mangalore and re-numbered as A...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 2007

Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Devanand Automobiles

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-14-2007

Reported in: [2008]304ITR50(KAR); [2008]304ITR50(Karn)

K.L. Manjunath, J.1. This appeal is by the Revenue challenging the concurrent findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, in I.T.A. No. 488/Bang/2000 raising the following substantial questions of law:Whether the Hindu undivided family which is a partnership firm is entitled for remuneration since no individual partner is working on behalf of the partnership firm2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. During the course of arguments, it is noticed by us that the Tribunal while dismissing the appeal of the Revenue has relied upon its judgment in I.T.A. No. 502/Bang/97 in the case of the assessee itself for the assessment year 1993-94. For the assessment year 1993-94, the relief had been granted by the Tribunal to the assessee holding that a karta who is representing the Hindu undivided family is entitled for remuneration under the partnership deed. The order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 2007

Sri K.P. Subramanya S/O Late Chinnappa Naidu Vs. Smt. B. Gowramma W/O ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-14-2007

Reported in: ILR2008KAR1523; 2008(6)KLJ482; 2008(1)KCCR311; 2008(2)AIRKarR263; AIR2008NOC1239; 2008(3)ICC685; 2008AIHC1675(Kar)

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the defendant No. 1 in OS No. 593 of 2001 pending before the court of the IX Additional City Civil Judge at Bangalore [CCH No. 10], is aggrieved by the order dated 9.4.2007 passed on IA No. III, an application filed under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the defendant - petitioner in the suit praying for rejection of the plaint, which came to be dismissed.2. It is contended, inter alia, that the learned trial Judge has committed an error; that the trial court has failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it in a proper manner; that the order is required to be set aside, application allowed and plaint rejected.3. Notice had been issued to the respondents and the respondents have entered appearance through counsel.4. I have heard Smt. Anuradha Urs, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jayakumar, learned Counsel for respondent No....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 2007

Srinath S/O Late Ramanagouda Alias Ramangondappa Patil Vs. State of Ka ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-13-2007

Reported in: [2008(119)FLR248]

Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The petitioner's father was an Agriculture Assistant In the service of the Government of Karnataka and he died on 16th December, 1986. At the time of the death of his father, the petitioner was only three years old. He attained majority in the month of July, 2001. Immediately after attaining majority, the petitioner submitted an application for appointment In Government service on compassionate grounds. However, his application was rejected by the Government as per Annexure-A5 communication dated 30th October, 2001. According to Annexure-A5 communication the application of the petitioner was belated in view of the provisions contained in Rule 9(2) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996. Aggrieved by Annexuna-A5, the petitioner filed Application No. 10454 of 2001 In the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal praying to quash Annexure-A5. After considering the averments. In the application and the case law, the Tribunal dismiss...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 2007

Smt. Revamma Wife of Sri Municipal Puttaiah and Sri Renukaiah Son of S ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-12-2007

Reported in: 2008(4)KarLJ42; 2008(3)KCCRSN184; 2008(2)AIRKarR384; AIR2008NOC1241; 2008AIHC2002(Kar)

Ajit J. Gunjal, J.1. The appeals are admitted to consider the following substantial question of law:Whether the Lower Appellate Court was justified in reversing the judgment and decree of the Trial Court holding that item No. 2 is self-acquired property of defendant No. 1?Both these appeals are disposed of by this common judgment. During the course of this judgment, the parties would be referred to as per their ranking in this Trial Court.Appeal No. 883/2006 is filed by the plaintiff. Appeal No. 1240/2006 is filed by defendants 2 and 3.2. Plaintiff filed a suit for partition and separate possession of 1/6th shore in the suit schedule property. The suit schedule properties are item No. 1 which consists of 0.22 guntas of wet land, one old house and one new house situated at Honnudike village; the second item which consists of a dry land measuring 4 acres 35 guntas in Sy. No. 114/3 and 3 acres 1 guntas in Sy. No. 114/ 4 of Tavarekere village; the third item is in respect of movable proper...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 2007

Food World Super Markets Ltd. and ors. Vs. State at the Instance of th ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-12-2007

Reported in: ILR2008KAR664; 2008(4)KarLJ268; 2008(3)KCCR1629; 2008(2)AIRKarR80; 2008CriLJNOC417; 2008(4)Crimes220

ORDERSubhash B. Adi, J.1. A private complaint is lodged by the State on behalf of the Drugs Control Department, Bangalore for an offence punishable under Section 7(1)(a) Sub-clause (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act.2. The case alleged against the petitioners is that, the officials of the Drugs Control Department visited the retail shop of accused No. 1 - Company and found that, the Itch Guard 25 mg cream was sold at higher rate than the MRP + local taxes, In this regard, it is noticed that, a stacker was fixed showing the MRP at Rs. 31/- with bar code No. 024975. The officials seized three such Itch Guard cream under the panchanama dated 16.8.2002. They verified the MRP of the said product and found that, as per the purchase invoice No. 6513 dated 9.8.2002, the Itch Guard 25 mg cream batch No. IG119, the MRP is fixed at Rs. 24.70 paise + local taxes extra. Calculating the local taxes at 12%, the total value of the Itch Guard comes to Rs. 27,66 paise. However, the accused No. 1 - Co...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 11 2007

Manjula Kudligi Vs. the President, Bethony Educational Society,

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-11-2007

Reported in: ILR2008KAR583; 2008(1)KCCR483

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. Petitioner - party-in-person has sought for a direction, directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner employee with all benefits and full payments of arrears of salary. Further, petitioner - party-in-person has questioned the correctness of the order dated 24th November 2006 on the file of the Member, Educational Appellate Tribunal and Principal District Judge, Belgaum in E.A.T. No. 5/1991 vide Annexure B. Petitioner has also sought for grant of exemplary cost to first respondent - Management for dismissing the petitioner, resulting in stigma on the character of the petitioner.2. The undisputed facts of the case are that, petitioner - party in person, had earlier filed W.P. No. 17108/2005 assailing the correctness of the order dated 18th June 2005 passed by the Educational Appellate Tribunal, Belgaum in EAT. No. 5/1991 vide Annexure B to the said writ petition. The said writ petition had come up for consideration before this Court on 20th January 2006 and...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 11 2007

Visveswaraiah Technological University Vs. Debashree Chowdhury D/O Sub ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-11-2007

Reported in: 2008(4)KarLJ343; 2008(1)KCCR79; 2008(2)AIRKarR257; AIR2008NOC1307(DB)

1. Though the Matter is posted for preliminary hearing, the scope of enquiry in this petition is limited, with the consent of learned Counsel on both sides the matter is taken up for final disposal.2. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 27.02.2006 allowing the writ petition, the present appeal is filed by the respondent University. The brief facts necessary for consideration in this appeal are that:The writ petitioners, two students had approached this Court challenging the non approval of their admission by the University on the ground of not possessing the required minimum percentage of marks in the qualifying examination. It is to be noted that for admission of MCA and MBA course the qualifying marks prescribed by the University was 50%. Though the 1st petitioner had obtained 49.4% and the 2nd petitioner had obtained 49%, they had been admitted by the college and were prosecuting their studies. On receipt of the particulars of the admission the appellant U...

Tag this Judgment!

  • Last »

Save Judgments · Add Notes · Store Search Results · Organize Client Files

Start your Free Trial