Karnataka Court August 2007 Judgments
B.R. Nagaraja Vs. the Director (P and It) and Appellate Authority, Kpt ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-14-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KarLJ109; 2008(1)AIRKarR431; 2008LabIC(NOC)338(Kar)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition by an employee of the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd., who, it appears, was inflicted with certain punishment pursuant to the holding of a domestic enquiry for examining certain misconducts on the part of the petitioner while in the service of the corporation.2. The disciplinary authority having found the petitioner guilty of the charges had inflicted the punishment of stoppage of three increment with cumulative effect and also recovery of a sum of Rs. 60,344/- from the petitioner, being the proportionate loss to the corporation attributable to the negligent conduct of the petitioner.3. Petitioner, being aggrieved by the order passed by the disciplinary authority, had preferred an appeal to the appellate authority in terms of Regulation 18 of the Karnataka Electricity Board Employees' Classification, Disciplinary, Control and Appeal Regulations, 1987 (for short, the Regulations]. It appears, the petitioner met with some succes...
Tag this Judgment!Sri B.G. Devarajaiah S/O Gurudevaiah Vs. the Commissioner for Public I ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-13-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)KarLJ234; 2007(4)KCCR2468; 2007(6)AIRKarR21
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Petitioner, an employee of the 4th respondent- S.T.S. Education Society, working as in-charge Head Master at its High School known as Maruthi Rural School at Yeligur, Kunigal taluk, Tumkur, is aggrieved that his functioning/working as Head Master albeit on in-charge basis during the past almost 30 years has not yielded result to the petitioner to regularise him in such post notwithstanding several rounds of litigation before the authorities and before this Court in the earlier two rounds of writ litigation.2. Petitioner has sought for quashing the order dated 11.9.2006 passed in Appeal No. 11/2004 by the 1st respondent-Commissioner for Public Instructions acting as an Appellate Authority exercising powers under Section 130 of the Karnataka Education Act, (copy produced at Annexure-A to the writ petition) and has sought for issue of further directions to The Commissioner for Public Instructions, the Director (Secondary Education), the Deputy Director of P...
Tag this Judgment!Bhimappa S/O. Basappa Guddad Vs. the State of Karnataka, Department of ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-13-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR3881; 2007(6)KarLJ222; 2007(6)AIRKarR277
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner is challenging the Notification dated 08.12.2006 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Bijapur - the 2nd respondent herein vide Annexure-C insofar as it relates to reservation for the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Jigajeevani Gram Panchayat.2. Petitioner claims to be an elected Member of the 4th respondent - Gram Panchayat and has been elected as Adhyaksha of the Jigajeevani Gram Panchayat in the elections held on 28.03.2005. Petitioner belongs to the general category.3. By the impugned Notification - Annexure-C, the post of Adhyaksha is reserved in favour of Backward Class-A (Women). Petitioner is aggrieved by the reservation made to the post of Adhyaksha in the 4th respondent- Gram Panchayat in favour of Backward Class - A (Women),4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that as per Section 44(2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act'), the rotation for reservation is permissible for every five ...
Tag this Judgment!Gajanan S/O S.M. Datta Rao Vs. Jayamma W/O B.M. Siddanna and Shantha B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-13-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Kant11; ILR2007KAR4396; 2007(4)KCCRSN318
Subhash B. Adi, J.1. Though this matter was posted for orders, it was understood that the same would be heard for final disposal.2. This appeal is against the order dated 23.12.2006 passed against the obstructer, rejecting the objection raised in the execution of the decree. Obstructer is the appellant.3. The appellant obstructer in telegraphic language has stated that, the decree holder had filed HRC No. 10501/90 and the decree holder and the judgment debtor in order to defraud the obstructer entered into lease agreement dated 11.1.1988 as per Ex.P.5 produced in H.R.C.No. 10501/90. On 22.8.1994 HRC 10501/90 was allowed with cost. The judgment debtor was directed to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the schedule premises. On 28.9.1994, HRRP No. 959/94 and HRRP No. 1251/2994 were filed by the obstructer against the decree holder as well as the judgment debtor and the said HRRPs. were decided in his favour. Thereafter, on 20.2.2000, one Siddanna, P.A. Holder promised the obstruct...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Now Represented by Its Regional Manage ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-13-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ1252; 2007(6)KarLJ550; AIRKarR250
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. This appeal is by the insurer challenging the award in favour of the respondents.2. The facts are as follows:The first respondent is the widow and the second respondent is the mother of a deceased victim of a road accident. The deceased was the driver of a truck. The truck was hired to carry goods by one other who was the owner of the goods and who was accompanying the goods. There was also a cleaner on the track. The truck had stopped on the road side for a over-night halt and the driver had slept on the edge of the road, next to the vehicle. A jeep is said to have run over him during the night. The claim for compensation brought by respondents 1 and 2 was not resisted by the owner of the alleged offending vehicle, the appellant however, had contested the same. The appellant had adduced evidence to demonstrate the glaring inconsistencies from material on record, which were indisputable. The Tribunal however, has negated the same and affixed the liability on the a...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Shivashankarappa Mudegoudar M.B.B.S., M.S Vs. Dr. K. Aravind M.B.B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-10-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR3724; 2008(2)KarLJ388
Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. This writ appeal is filed against the judgment dated 28th October, 2006 in Writ Petition No. 10557 of 2006 which was allowed by the learned single Judge. The appellant was the 4th respondent in the writ petition which was filed by the 1st respondent herein.2. As per Annexure-'A' notification dated 7.6.2006, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Karnataka (Respondent No. 2 herein) invited applications from eligible candidates for appearing in the Entrance Test for Post-Graduate Super Speciality Courses (Medical Faculty) for the academic year 2006-07. One of the institutions mentioned in Annexure-'A' is the Bangalore Medical College, Bangalore where courses in M.Ch (Plastic Surgery) and M.Ch (Urology) Courses are offered. In Note (A) in the notification, it is specified that 'Karnataka Government in-service candidates should also appear for Entrance Test.' In Note (B), it is stated that 'admission to the Courses is subject to the admission rules of the Governm...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Shree Vishwothama theertha Swamigal, Mathadhipathi of Sri Sonda ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-10-2007
Reported in: ILR2007KAR3856; 2007(6)AIRKarR252
ORDERS. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. Petitioner has called in question the order passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Karwar, on I.A. No. 5 dated 14.9.2006 in R.A. No. 40/1999 whereby the lower appellate Court has allowed the application filed by the respondent under Order 18 Rule 18 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. Petitioner was the plaintiff in O.S. No. 66/1987 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.)., Karwar. The suit was for permanent injunction restraining the defendant/ respondent or his family members or any person claiming on his behalf from entering or trespassing into the suit land or interfering with his peaceful possession, occupation and enjoyment of the suit land i.e. Sy. No. 23/1 measuring 8 acres 24 guntas of Belur village in Karwar Taluk. It is the case of the defendant that he has been in possession and enjoyment of two acres of land out of the above 8 acres 24 guntas of land. It is also his case that the area in his possession consists of a house constructed by him, a well an...
Tag this Judgment!K.G. Basavarajappa and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-10-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)KarLJ17
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioners, assailing the correctness of the order dated 29-3-2003 passed by the 2nd respondent herein in Proceeding No. LND : CR : 103 : 2001-2002 and the order dated 20-3-2007 passed by the Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 1531 of 2003 vide Annexure-G and H respectively, have presented this writ petition. Further, petitioners have sought to direct the respondents to enable for making use of the said land in question for thrashing floor and manure pits in favour of the petitioners.2. The only grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that, land bearing Sy. No. 1 totally measures 6 acres 4 guntas situated at Kalaghatta Village and the same has been granted to the village community and the copy of sketch is produced vide Annexure-A and they are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. When things stood thus, at the request made by respondents 3 and 4 to the Tahsildar and Assistant Commissioner, that said land may be transferred to the Gove...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. by Its Manager Vs. Govindaraju S/O Dasapp ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-09-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ2152; 2007(6)KarLJ646
K.L. Manjunath, J 1. M.F.A. No. 12852/06 is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the quantum and also the liability. M.F.A. No. 13192/06 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded in M.V.C. No. 1481/06 by the Addl. M.A.C.T. (SCCH-6), Bangalore dt. 23.8.2006.2. In the circumstances by consent of both the parties these two appeals are heard together.3. On 12.2.2006 at about 5.00 p.m. the claimant was crossing Bangalore - Mysore Road in front of Gurushri Bar and Restaurant, Kengeri. At that point of time, the driver of motor cycle bearing No. KA41 E 3109 driving the same in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the petitioner, due to which he sustained grievous injuries. He was immediately shifted to Sahana Hospital, Kengeri and thereafter he was shifted to Victoria Hospital and again admitted to Mathru nursing home. According to the claimant, he has spent sufficient amount towards medical expenses and that due to the accident he has become permane...
Tag this Judgment!Girias Investment Pvt. Ltd., a Company Incorporated Under the Companie ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-09-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KarLJ40; 2007(5)AIRKarR627; AIR2007NOC2682
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. The controversy in this petition is in relation to acquisition of two bits of lands i.e., Sy.No.118 and 119 of Kannamangala village, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District purchased by the petitioners pursuant to two registered sale deeds dated 23.11.2005 and 26.11.2006. Under the said two sale deeds, the petitioner has purchased an extent of 2 acres 20 guntas in Sy.No.118 and an extent of 1 acre 10 guntas in Sy.No.119 pursuant to the aforesaid registered sale deeds. The case of the petitioners is that their vendor had got these two lands converted into non-agricultural lands pursuant to conversion certificate issued by the Competent Authority, a copy of which is produced at Annexure 'D'. According to them the two lands are being treated as non-agricultural lands. Suffice it to say that pursuant to the notifications dated 05.12.2005 and 02.06.2006 under Section 28(1) & (2) and Section 28(4) respectively of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board A...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »