Karnataka Court March 2007 Judgments

The United India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its Branch Manager Vs. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007ACJ2342; ILR2007KAR1585

V. Jagannathan, J.1. Whether carrying of 'one or two bags of grains' in a goods, vehicle will amount to 'carrying of goods' is the question that is involved in this appeal.2. Briefly stated the facts are to the effect that the deceased Eranna was found travelling in a lorry bearing No. AHT 6393 carrying 'two bags' of pulses and jowar and the said lorry belonging to the respondent No. 7 herein dashed to a parked lorry bearing No. ATT 1851 at about 5.00 a.m. near Sadashiv Pet on 6.8.1996. Following the said accident, the above said Eranna sustained injuries on his vital parts of the body and died on the spot. A case was registered against the driver of the lorry No. AHT 6393 for rash and negligent driving. The claim petition filed by the wife and children of the deceased Eranna came to be allowed by the MACT, Basavakalyan awarding a sum of Rs. 2,79,200/-as compensation and putting the liability on the appellant-Insurance Company. Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the Insurance...

Rama Naik Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(3)KarLJ373; ILR2007(2)Kar1521; 2007(2)KCCR1346; 2007(3)AIRKarR477

ORDERK.L. Manjunath, J.1. Heard Sri. Mahale, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the Government Advocate for the respondents.2. The petitioner herein is questioning Annexure-K dt. 11.8.2005 issued by the Tahsildar, Gangavati, rejecting the representation of the petitioner to grant saguvali chit in respect of 4 acres of land in Sy.53 of Virupapur Village, on the ground that the land in question is situated within 5 KMs. from the Municipal limits of Gangavati Town and that the petitioner is not entitled for regularisation of unauthorised cultivation.3. After hearing, this court has noticed the following undisputed facts:The petitioner was in unauthorised cultivation of 4 acres of land in Sy.No. 53 of Virupapur Village. He had filed an application for regularisation of his unauthorised cultivation before the Committee constituted for regularisation of the land. Accordingly, the Committee considered the application of the petitioner and passed an order to regularise the...

S. Jagadish Vs. Dr. S. Kumaraswamy since dead by LR's S.K. Lingaraju a ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2008KAR87; 2008(2)KCCRSN119; 2008(3)ICC421

N. Kumar, J.1. This is the 4th defendant's second appeal against the decree for partition and separate possession. For the purpose of convenience, the parties to this appeal are referred to as they are referred to in the suit.2. The plaintiff-Dr. S. Kumaraswamy, the 1st defendant-S. Gurudatt, the 4th defendant-S. Jagadish are the three sons of late Sri. H. Siddalingaiah. 2nd defendant-Smt. Nagarathnaand 3rd defendant-Smt. Umadevi are his daughters. The plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 died during the pendency of the proceedings and their legal representatives have been brought on record.3. The case of the plaintiff is, his father late Sri. M. Siddalingaiah had no ancestral nucleus and he acquired the suit schedule property from his personal income as he was the former Registrar of the Karnataka University. He died on 13.8.1980 at Mysore. After the death of Sri. M. Siddalingaiah, plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 became the tenants in common each getting 1/5th share in the property. Proper...

M.D. ZameeruddIn (Deceased) by L.Rs. Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and o ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This writ petition relates to certain proceedings said to be pending before the Deputy Commissioner at Bidar, on an application filed by respondents 2, 3, 4 and 5 in the present writ petition, seeking for review of the earlier order dated 30-9-2003 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bidar, filed in Rev. No. ATY/Cr. 2762/1970-71.2. The earlier order dated 30-9-2003 was one passed by the Deputy Commissioner in exercise of his powers under Section 4 of the Hyderabad Abolition of Inams Act, 1954 (for short called 'the Act'), granting occupancy rights in favour of the applicants. It appears that in such proceedings which was against the inamdars, the present respondents 2 to 5 had also got themselves impleaded as parties on the premise that they have interest in the subject lands as purchasers from other third parties.3. The Deputy Commissioner had nevertheless proceeded to confer occupancy rights in favour of the applicants i.e., the inamdars present writ pe...

The Management of Hindustan Lever Ltd., Rep. by Its Law Officer Vs. Sr ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007KAR1591; 2007(3)KLJ544; 2007(3)KCCRSN152; 2007(3)AIRKarR368

ORDERA.S. Bopanna, J.1. The brief facts leading to this petition are that, in order to comply with the requirement of the provisions of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') the petitioner filed necessary serial application in SA No. 1/1999 before the Labour Court, Hubli seeking approval of the dismissal of the respondent by order dated 12.1.1999. During the pendency of the same, the respondent chose to raise a dispute regarding dismissal by filing a petition under Section 10(4-A) of the Act in KID No. 52/1989 before the same Court Both the matters were proceeding simultaneously until the petitioner filed an application under Section 11 of the Act in SA No. 1/1999 indicating that in view of the workman challenging the order of dismissal by raising a dispute, the application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act has become infructuous. The petitioner filed objections to the same. The Labour Court after considering the matter by its orde...

Vanajakshi Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(4)KarLJ721;

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This writ petition is as a result of conversion of C.P. No. 19822 of 1991 in terms of the common order passed on 28-5-2001.2. It is now found that the civil petition itself was not tenable, inasmuch as the civil petition was one for treating a cross-objection that had been filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority in an appeal that was pending before the Appellate Authority at the instance of the fifth respondent (Nagamma) in this petition.3. While in fact no cross-objection was pending before the Land Tribunal and the cross-objection had also been rejected by the Land Tribunal as not maintainable even in terms of the averments made in the civil petition and the petitioner had filed further a civil revision petition in C.R.P. No. 2059 of 1990 before this Court, it is stated that the civil petition was filed by way of abundant caution in the hope and in the event of the civil revision petition being allowed by this Court.4. Be that as it may,...

Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Formerly Bharti Tele Ventures Ltd.), Represented b ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2007)7VST505(Karn); 2007(3)AIRKarR309; 2007-08(5)VATToday103

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition by an assessee who is aggrieved by the reassessment order and demands raised pursuant to that under the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003.2. Petitioner though has statutory remedy of appeal has invoked jurisdiction of this Court on the premise that the decision of the assessing authority is clearly illegal and untenable in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. reported in : [2006]282ITR273(SC) .3. Sri. Sridharan, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioner has raised several contentions, mainly amongst which is that Supreme Court had in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam emphatically declared that so far as the Electro Magnetic Waves or Radio Frequency is concerned, it cannot be considered as goods and therefore there is no transfer of any right of ownership in goods within the meaning of Article 366(29-A)(d). Submission of the l...

Sri W.E. Sambandam S/O Late W. Ekambaram Vs. Sri W.E. Sathyanarayanan ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007KAR1484; 2007(4)KarLJ1; 2007(3)KCCR1840; 2007(3)AIRKarR377(DB)

R. Gururajan, J.1. Sri W E Sambandam, has preferred this appeal aggrieved by the judgment dtd 31-3-2000 passed in O.S. No. 8386/1980 on the file of the 30th Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore. The facts as narrated in the appeal memo are as under;Respondent-plaintiff W.E. Sathyanarayanan, has filed a partition suit in O.S. No. 8386/80 against the appellant-defendant praying for the judgment and decree for partition and separate possession of plaintiff's share in the suit schedule properties by metes and for mesne profits. In the suit, the respondent-plaintiff claimed a share in the suit property on the ground that he is a member of the family of late Sri W. Ekambaram, is entitled for a share in the property. Defendant-appellant entered appearance through counsel and filed a written statement and additional written statement. Apart from denying the right sought for by the plaintiff, defendant also took a contention that the plaintiff was adopted by his uncle and as such the plaintif...

Shivarayappa Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(4)KarLJ543;

ORDERK.L. Manjunath, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3.2. After hearing, this Court noticed the following undisputed facts.--Pursuant to the decree obtained in O.S. No. 114 of 1990 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bailhongal respondent 4-Neelawwa submitted a varadhi requesting the Revenue Inspector to change the revenue records to her name. Accordingly on 6-11-2002 pursuant to the decree the revenue records were changed to the name of the 4th respondent. Subsequently, based on the interim order of status quo obtained by the petitioner in C.R.P. No. 305 of 2003 from this Court, approached the very same Revenue Inspector. The Revenue Inspector by his order dated 31-5-2003 has changed the revenue entries made by him on 6-11-2002 in favour of the 4th respondent and further entered in the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. The order of the Revenue Inspector dated 31-5-...

Zahoor Ali Baig and ors. Vs. Registrar General, High Court of Karnatak ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2007(2)Kar1754; 2007(3)KLJ193; 2007(3)KCCRSN199; 2007(5)AIRKarR232; 2007CrLJNOC850

ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. Heard Sri H.M. Thimmarayappa, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri A.V. Ramakrishna, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the material on record.2. Petitioners have sought for quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 23090 of 2006, pending on the file of learned X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.3. Petitioners are the Police Officers, who arrested Murugesh Babu s/o. Smt. Shantamma. According to Shantamma, her son Murugesh Babu was arrested during the midnight intervening between 23-6-2006 and 24-6-2006. On the next day, she went to Malur Police Station and enquired with regard to the whereabouts of her son. The police informed that her son was not arrested. On 27-6-2006, on enquiry, she came to know that her son is in custody in Indiranagar Police Station, Bangalore and hence, she filed Writ Petition No. 62 of 2006 (HO, dated 23-8-2006 Smt. Shanthamma v. Sub-Inspector of Police, Malur Polic...