Karnataka Court July 2007 Judgments
P. Honnamma W/O Late Chandu Shetty Vs. B. Jagannath S/O B. Santhappa a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Kant184; ILR2007KAR3892; 2008(1)KarLJ97
V. Jagannathan, J.1. The short question involved in this appeal is, whether the courts below committed error of law in wrongly interpreting the quit notice issued by the appellant-plaintiff to the respondents-defendants?2. This appeal has arisen following the dismissal of the suit filed by the appellant herein and the said suit was filed in O.S. No. 102/1994 for delivery of vacant possession and also mesne profit in respect of the suit schedule property on the ground that the respondents who are the defendants before the trial court, were the tenants of the suit schedule property pursuant to the rent bond executed as per Ex.D-2 between the appellant and the second defendant. The said suit of the appellant was resisted by the respondents by contending that the quit notice was defective in nature inasmuch as it was issued in contravention of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and therefore, the suit is not maintainable. Learned trial judge found that there was no dispute between...
Tag this Judgment!Ajit Mahendra Bhandari S/O Mahendra Bhandari Vs. Secretary to Governme ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)KarLJ587; 2007(5)AIRKarR290
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition by a lecturer in an unaided private educational institution is one directed against the order passed by the state government purporting to be in exercise of the power under Section 131 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983.2. For the purpose of disposal of this writ petition, it is not necessary go to the merits of the claim of the petitioner, as it is noticed that the impugned endorsement dated 7-8-2006 issued on behalf of the first respondent is one not tenable on the face of it.3. Petitioner having certain grievances against the second respondent-employer had invoked the provisions of Section 131 of the Act and had presented a revision petition on 6-6-2006, aggrieved by the action of the management, which had the effect of reducing the salary of the petitioner.4. The officer acting on behalf of the state government has issued the impugned endorsement indicating that the petitioner should have in the first instance availed of the appellate...
Tag this Judgment!Yelandau Arasikere Deshikendra Samsthana by Its Sri Gnanaprabhu Siddha ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2008(4)KarLJ323; 2007(5)AIRKarR565; AIR2007NOC2439
V. Jagannathan, J.1. The appellant herein had filed a suit in O.S.No. 68/1987 on the file of the learned Civil Judge, Tarikere, praying for declaration and possession of the suit properties and the said suit came to be dismissed by the trial court and the appeal preferred in. R.A.No. 12/1993 on the file of the learned Addl. District Judge, Chickamagalur, also was dismissed and thus this second appeal has arisen.2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this second appeal are to the effect that the appellant herein being Yelanadu Arasikere Deshikendra Samsthana filed a suit before the trial court by contending that the suit properties belonged to the appellant Samsthana as the said properties were under the control and management of late Sri Basavaraj Deshikendra Swamiji of the appellant Samsthana following a Trust Deed executed by one Gowramma on 1.7.1935. By which deed, the said Gowramma had entrusted the suit properties with the then head of the Samsthana, Basavaraj Deshikendra Sw...
Tag this Judgment!H. Govindaraju S/O Late Hanumanthaiah Vs. Shri Shankaralinge Gowda, Ma ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Kant177; ILR2007KAR3534; 2007(6)KarLJ1452
ORDER1. This contempt petition is filed alleging violation/disobedience of the Order dated 30.07.2005, passed by the learned Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore, in O.S. No. 16507/2005.2. Since important question of law has been raised, it is necessary to consider the facts and circumstances in brief:The complainant as a plaintiff filed a suit in, O.S. No. 16507/2005 on the file of the City Civil Judge, in respect of a house property, praying for relief of permanent injunction. In the suit, interim application was filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC for grant of temporary injunction. After hearing both the parties, on 30.07.2005 the Trial Court passed an interim Order directing both the parties to maintain statuesque. It is alleged that when such statuesque Order was passed, on 28.04.2007 without notice to the complainant, the respondents demolished the house of the plaintiff and others and this act is in clear disobedience of the statuesqueOrder granted on 30.07.2005. Invoking the...
Tag this Judgment!Akhila Karnataka Ayurveda, Siddha and Homeopathy, Registered Professio ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)KarLJ620; ILR2007(4)Kar4069; 2007(6)AIRKarR190
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. Mr. B. Veerappa, High Court Government Advocate is directed to take notice for respondents 1, 3 and 4.2. The first petitioner is an Association registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. The other petitioners are practicing in the field of Siddha, Ayurveda, Unani and Homeopathy Systems of Medicines in various places in the District of Tumkur in the State of Karnataka. Petitioners 2 to 18 are the Doctors practicing at various places in the State of Karnataka as stated earlier. The case of the petitioners is that they are Vaidyas (Doctors) having a valid licence to practice based on experience in the field of Ayurveda and Unani Systems and integrated Systems of Medicines from the State Council of Ayurvedic and Unani Medicines, Patna, Bihar, which is a body recognised under the Bihar Development of Ayurvedic and Unani Systems of Medicine Act, 1951. One of the certificates issued by the said State Council of Ayurvedic and Unani Medicines is p...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Puttaramaiah S/O Putte Gowda Vs. Sri Thimmaiah S/O Late Dasappa an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)KCCR2240.
V. Jagannathan, J.1. This appeal is by the plaintiff before the trial court and although the suit filed by him in O.S. No. 64/1993 came to be allowed by the trial court in part, the appeal preferred by the respondents herein came to be allowed by the lower appellate court in R.A. No. 15/2000 and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court was set aside and the suit was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree of the lower appellate court, this second appeal is preferred by the plaintiff.2. The facts fall within a very narrow compass inasmuch as the appellant filed a suit for specific performance basing on an agreement of sale dated 16.12.1992 executed by the respondents-defendants and it is the case of the appellant that the respondents-defendants agreed to sell the property, which was the subject matter of the agreement of sale, for Rs. 75,000/- and received Rs. 55,000/- from the appellant under the said agreement. However, the first respondent-defendant failed to ke...
Tag this Judgment!Premakumari W/O. Kumar and Kumar S/O. Hombaiah Vs. United India Insura ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-17-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ1749; 2007(6)KarLJ642
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. In this appeal, the parents of the deceased child are seeking enhancement of compensation.2. The parents having sought for compensation on the death of a minor child who was aged 2-1/2 years at the time of accident, the Tribunal has arrived at Rs. 63,000/- as the just compensation. This is on the basis of the judgment of this Court reported in ILR 2002 KAR. 5149 wherein it was laid down that the multiplier method has to be adopted, even in the case of death of a minor instead of taking into account the structured formula of global compensation prescribed under the Schedule and has proceeded to assess the compensation payable. It is this, which is under question in this appeal.3. The counsel fox the appellant would contend that in so far as the death of a child is concerned, going by the trend of judgments resting with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of NEW India Assurance Company Limited V. Satender : AIR2007SC324 wherein it vas held that in cases of...
Tag this Judgment!Premakumari and anr. Vs. United India Insurance and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-17-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR3476; 2007(3)Kar3476; 2007(5)AIRKarR308; AIR2007NOC2283.
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. In this appeal, the parents of the deceased child are seeking enhancement of compensation.2. The parents having sought for compensation on the death of a minor child who was aged 2-1/2 years at the time of accident, the Tribunal has arrived at Rs. 63,000/- as the just compensation. This is on the basis of the judgment of this Court reported in ILR 2002 KAR 5149 wherein it was laid down that the multiplier method has to be adopted even in the case of death of a minor instead of taking into account the structured formula of global compensation prescribed under the schedule and has proceeded to assess the compensation payable. It is this, which is under question in this appeal.3. The counsel for the appellant would contend that in so far as the death of a child is concerned, going by the trend of judgments resting with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Limited v. Satener : AIR2007SC324 , wherein it was held that in cases of chil...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Kempegowda S/O Chikagangappa Vs. the National Highway Authority by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-17-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ARBLR393(Kar); ILR2007KAR3700; 2008(1)KarLJ628
A.S. Bopanna, J.1. Though these appeals are listed for admission, the contesting respondents are served and represented by their learned Counsel. Further the only question which requires to be considered is as to whether the arbitration suit filed before the trial Court was barred by time or not and if it is not so, the entire proceedings is to be redone by the Court below, and as such admitting the appeal arising out of the preliminary point and keeping it pending is not desirable. Considering these aspects of the matter, these appeals are taken up for final disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel and disposed of by this order.2. The Court below had clubbed all the suits, viz., A.S. Nos. 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73 and 74/2004 from which the present appeals arise and a common order has been passed. Accordingly, all these appeals are against the common order. As such all these appeals are clubbed together and disposed of by this common order.3. The different extents...
Tag this Judgment!Vasavi Florex Vs. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR28]; 2007(6)KarLJ317; (2008)ILLJ234Kant
ORDERH.V.G. Ramesh, J.1. Petitioner has sought for to issue writ of certiorari to quash Annexure-B, dated 9-1-2001/8-12-2001 passed by 3rd respondent and also to quash the order dated 30-8-2005 passed under Section 7-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 by the 2nd respondent at Annexure-C.2. According to the petitioner, petitioner is a cent per cent export oriented floriculture company and it does not come within the definition of agricultural farms as per the list of industries to which the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 applies, since no agricultural activity is being carried out, rather a fused rock called 'rock wool' is being used for the purpose of growing flowers and as such the provisions of Section 7-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 does not apply to the petitioner's unit.3. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents-authority has submitted that as per the a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »