Karnataka Court August 2007 Judgments
Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Now Represented by Its ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-22-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ2767; ILR2007KAR3885; 2008(1)KarLJ715
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. This appeal is filed by the insurer challenging its liability to meet the claim for compensation. The respondents 1 to 4 are the claimants who had sought compensation on account of the death of the husband of the first respondent, while traveling in a lorry belonging to the fifth respondent. It was claimed that the deceased had purchased agricultural implements and had boarded the lorry along with the same on the Mumbai - Hyderabad road to reach his village. The vehicle having met with an accident along the way, when the driver is said to have lost control and the vehicle having turned turtle - the said passenger had died on the spot. The Tribunal having held that there was negligence on the part of the driver and since the risk to the occupants of the vehicle was covered has held the appellant liable to pay the compensation awarded. It is in this background that the appellant is before this Court.2. The counsel for the appellant contends that the vehicle in quest...
Tag this Judgment!Nagappa Pradhani S/O Danappa P., Vs. the State of Karnataka, Departmen ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-22-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KarLJ635; 2007(4)KCCRSN313; 2007(6)AIRKarR69
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.W.P. No.14149/20061. Writ petitioners claim to have been working as Lecturers in the 3rd respondent -Karnataka Chitrakala Parishath, a society registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the orders of termination produced as Annexure- F, G and H dated 6.10.2006, 6.10.2006 and 29.9.2006 respectively issued by the Administrator of the society, who is running the educational institution, which read as under:ANNEXURE-EThe explanation submitted by you on 5th October 2006 is not satisfactory.Hence, your services at Chitrakala Parishath as Lecturer in the Department of Sculpture, College of Fine Arts, is terminated immediately with effect from 6th October, 2006.ANNEXURE - GThe Explanation submitted by you on 5th October 2006 is not satisfactory.Hence, your services at Chitrakala Parishath as Lecturer in the Department of Painting, College of Fine Arts, is terminated immediately with effect f...
Tag this Judgment!Channabasappa a/F Muppayya Hiremath Vs. Veerayya Ulavayya Hiremath (Si ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-21-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR4381; 2008(3)KarLJ283
V. Jagannathan, J.1. The first defendant before the trial Court is the appellant heroin and he is aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the lower Appellate Court in R.A.No. 15/1991, by which, the learned Judge of the lower Appellate Court confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court in O.S.No. 42/1985, allowing the suit filed by the respondents-plaintiffs for declaration and permanent injunction.2. The brief facts shorn out of unnecessary details are to the effect that the plaintiffs 1 to 3 being the fourth son, third son, and fifth son of original porosities Veerayya and 4th plaintiff being one of the grand sons of first son of above said Veerayya filed the suit against the appellant herein (adopted son of Muppayya- the sixth son of Veeraiah and the second defendant-being the son of first son of Veerayya, for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the suit properties by claiming that the plaintiffs and the second defendant were the only legal heirs ...
Tag this Judgment!Symphony Services Corp. (India) Pvt. a Private Limited Company Incorpo ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-21-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ARBLR295(Kar); 2008(1)KarLJ24
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition has called in question the order passed by the learned City Civil Judge CCH No. 11 Bangalore on an application made by the respondent herein under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act in AA No. 131/2007. The copy of the impugned order is at Annexure 'K'.2. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition can be summarised as follows:The petitioner, a multi-national Company appointed the respondent as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in terms of the letter issued to him. Pursuant to the said appointment, the petitioner and the respondent have separately entered into a Confidential Information and Invention Assignment Agreement providing for non-disclosure of confidential information, which he would have acquired in the course of his employment with the petitioner-Company. On 11.04.2007, the petitioner terminated the services of respondent from the petitioner-Company. The reason for termination was that the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Hotel Vrinda Prakash Represented by the Managing Partner Smt. Chitravr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-21-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Kant187; 2007(2)CTLJ399(Kar); ILR2008KAR1311; 2007(6)KarLJ624
ORDERS. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. Petitioners had borrowed a loan of rupees one crore from the respondent - Corporation for the purpose of developing touring unit/Hotel in Karkala Town. In this connection, petitioners have entered into a Deed of Hypothecation dated 20.09.2003 providing for the terms and conditions of repayment of the loan. Petitioners made an application for foreclosure/prepayment of the loan account. The respondents sent a communication to the petitioners as per Annexure 'C' on 15.07.2005 stating that the foreclosure of the loan account is permissible upon repayment of equivalent two quarterly principle installments with the prior approval in writing of the Corporation and subject to the terms and conditions as may be stipulated by the Corporation in that behalf. It was further informed that payment of 2% of the premium on the advanced payment/foreclosure account is necessary. Petitioners have called in question the said communication at Annexure 'C' in this writ petition. P...
Tag this Judgment!Consolidated Coffee Limited Vs. M. Satish S/O. Late M.P. Mallegowda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)KarLJ91
V. Jagannathan, J.1. This second appeal is by the defendant before the trial court in O.S. No. 311/1989. The said suit was filed by the respondent herein praying for a declaration that the plaintiff is the owner of 'B' schedule suit property and for its possession after determining exact area of encroachment by the defendant. The trial court dismissed the suit of the plaintiff on the sole ground that the appellant herein had established his right over the suit property i.e., 1 acre 16 guntas of land in Sy.No. 19, Kasaba Hobli, Chikmagalur Taluk, on the basis of adverse procession and having accepted the plea of the appellant, based on the adverse possession, the trial court, thus dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff giving rise to an appeal being filed by him before the lower appellate court in R.A. No. 87/94 Learned judge of the lower appellate court after appreciating the ease of the parties and in the light of the judgment rendered by the trial court, came to a conclusion that ...
Tag this Judgment!Joseph Albert Lewis S/O Thimothy Lewis Vs. Michael Roque Lewis S/O Thi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KarLJ599; ILR2007(4)Kar4174; 2007(5)AIRKarR617; AIR2007NOC2681
A.S. Bopanna, J.1. The appellant is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 22/1998. The respondents herein were also the respondents in the suit with the same rank. The plaintiff had initially filed a petition seeking probate of the WILL and testament dated 18.01.1995 said to have been executed by the father of the parties namely late Thimothy Lewis. The father of the parties expired on 19.03.1995. The said petition was registered as P & SC No. 20/1996. The fourth respondent had lodged a caveat in respect of the same and as such the petition was converted as a suit in O.S. No. 22/1998. After trial, the said suit came to be dismissed by judgment and decree dated 24.7.2001. Claiming to be aggrieved by such dismissal of the suit, the plaintiff is before this Court in this appeal.2. Sri B.V. Krishna, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant while assailing the judgment and decree impugned in this appeal contended that the Court below has proceeded at a tangent. According to the learned Counsel, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Venkatesh Vs. Sri P. Subbaiah and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR3912; 2008(1)KarLJ263; 2007(6)AIRKarR17
A.S. Bopanna, J.1. This appeal is by the unsuccessful petitioner in Misc. No. 598/ 2006. The said petition was filed by the appellant under Order IX Rule 13 with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure seeking an order to set aside the judgment and decree dated 02.09.2005 passed in O.S. No. 8635/2004. The Court below after considering the rival contentions has dismissed the petition by its order dated 06.03.2007. As such the appellant claiming to be aggrieved has impugned the same in this appeal.2. I have heard Sri K. Suman, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri K. Subba Rao, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of Sri C. Shankar Reddy, learned Counsel for the first respondent. Though notice was issued to the second respondent and service was awaited, his presence at this juncture is unnecessary and as such the matter is heard and disposed by this order.3. It is well settled that in a petition filed under Order IX Rule 13, the issue of setting aside an ex parte judgment and decree could...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Krishnan Nair Vs. Government of India by Its Secretary
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR4613; 2008(3)KarLJ363;
ORDERAshok B. Hinchigeri, J.1. The petitioner's grievance in this case is that the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension (S.S.S.P. for short) is not granted to him.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a trained Aircraft Engineer. He joined Indian National Army (' INA' for short) under the inspiring leadership of Netaji Subhashchandra Bose in Malaysia, in 1943. On the completion of his military training, he was sent to Burma-India border to fight the British. He was captured by the British and imprisoned in Nilganj in Zassore District of the present Bangladesh. He was detained there for a period of eight months.3. The petitioner and his comrades were represented and successfully defended by the Advocates, Sriyuths Pandit Jawaharalal Nehru and Bulabai Desai, in the historic Red Fort trial in 1945. On this trial culminating in his release, he returned to his hometown, Udupi. He sought S.S.S.P. His application, after due verification, was forwarded by the Karnataka Governm...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Krishnan Nair S/o Narayana Nair Vs. Government of India by Its Sec ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)KCCRSN315.
ORDERAshok B. Hinchigeri, J.1. The petitioner's grievance In this case is that the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension (S.S.S.P. for short) is not granted to him.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a trained Aircraft Engineer. He joined Indian National Army ('INA' for short) under the inspiring leaderhip of Netaji Subhashchandra Bose in Mlalaysia, in 1943. On the completion of his military training, he was sent to Burma-India border to fight the British. He was captured by the British and imprisoned in Nilganj in Zassore District of the present Bangladesh. He was detained there for a period of eight months.3. The petitioner and his comrades were represented and successfully defended by the Advocates, Sriyuths Pandit Jawaharalal Nehru and Bulabai Desai, in the historic Red Fort trial in 194S. On this trial culminating in his release, he returned to his hometown, Udupi. He sought S.S.S.P. His application, after due verification, was forwarded by the Karnataka Governme...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »