Karnataka Court November 2008 Judgments
Smt. Kittur YasmIn Riyaz and anr. Vs. Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-27-2008
Reported in: ILR2009KAR47
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the two Municipal councilors of Dandeli City Municipal Council challenging the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Karwar disqualifying them under Section 3(1)(b) of the Anti Defection Act, Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1987.2. The petitioners are councilors elected to the Dandeli City Municipal Council. They belong to the political party JD(S). There are total 31 councilors, JD(S)had got l6 councilors, Congress had got 6 councilors, BJP had got 4 councilors and 4 councilors are independent. The second respondent claims to be the President of Dandeli Block Janata Dal (S) party. He filed a complaint before the first respondent under Section 4 of the Act, alleging that petitioners herein, in the election held to the post of Adyaksha and Upadyaksha of the Dandeli City Municipal Council, on 29.02.2008, have not voted in favour of the official candidate of the JD(S) party, in spite of the issuance of a whi...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. N. Rukmini Vs. P. Puttaswami
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-27-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Kant61; ILR2009KAR71; 2009(2)KarLJ640; 2009(1)KCCR352; 2009(2)KLJ640; 2009(2)AIRKarR21
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. Petitioner in this petition has sought for quashing/setting-aside the order dated 20th September 2008 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) Hassan vide Annexure - D on the LA. filed by the petitioner under Order 26 Rule 10-A read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in M.C. No. 22/2004 and allow the said application.2. The petitioner and respondent are husband and wife, whose marriage was solemnized on 20th May 1994 as per the Hindu rites at Shimoga and out of the said wedlock, petitioner and respondent have two children by name Master Bharath and Kumari Shreyu, who are now aged about 13 and 10 years respectively. The case of petitioner is that, she is working as a 'woman constable' at Hassan and respondent is working as an 'Announcer' at AIR at Akashavani, Hassan and both of them are residing presently together at Akashavani quarters, Hassan and their relationship has so far been harmonious and that, petitioner is a dutiful and faithful wife and...
Tag this Judgment!Sohil Nivas Nireshwalia S/O Sujith Nivas Vs. Visvesvararya Technologic ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-27-2008
Reported in: 2009(3)KarLJ243; 2009(1)KCCR542; 2009(3)KLJ243; 2009(3)AIRKarR20; AIR2009NOC2040
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. The appellant in this writ appeal had filed writ petition No. 7748 of 2007 seeking for a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent- University to include the subject 'Statistics' in the eligible optional as per Rule (3) of the Government Order dated 28.02.2006 framed under the Karnataka Education Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fees Act) 1984 and also to announce his result and for a further direction to the 2nd respondent-Engineering College to regularise his admission and announce his result with permission to take up the examination by considering 'statistics' as an eligible optional for the next academic year.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that 'statistics' has to be treated as an optional subject along with Chemistry, Biotechnology, Computer Science, Biology and Electronics and take the marks obtained by the appellant in statistics for the purpose of calculating the aggregate marks for the purpose of admission to the engineering cou...
Tag this Judgment!W.S. Insulators of India Ltd. Now Called as W.S. Industries (India) Lt ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-27-2008
Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ310
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. The appellants are the unsuccessful writ petitioners in Writ Petition No. 3321/2008 where the appellants have prayed for issue of writ of prohibition restraining the third respondent-Deputy Commissioner to proceed with action initiated under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and also seeks to quash the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, where the mutation entries have been altered under Section 129 of the Act.2.1. The 1st appellant claims to have purchased an extent of 19 acres and 48 cents of land at Shettigere Villae, Jala Hobli, Devanahalli, Devanahalli Taluk from Sri Tukaram S. Pai under a registered sale deed dated 15.02.1973. The 2nd appellant claims to have purchased an extent of 3 acres and 28 cents at Shettigere Villae, Jala Hobli, Devanahalli, Devanahalli Taluk. The 3rd appellant claims to have purchased an extent of 14 acres and 37 cents Shettigere Village, Jala Hobli, Devanahalli...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Karnataka, Secretary to Government, Department of Co-oper ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-26-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)KarLJ709; 2009(1)KCCRSN9; 2009(2)KLJ709; 2009(2)AIRKarR74
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. Heard Sri Udaya Holla, the learned Advocate General appearing for appellant No. 1 and Sri Basavaprabhu S Patil, learned Senior Counsel appearing for appellants-2 and 3 and Sri Jayakumar S Patil, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent.2. The above appeal is directed against the interim order dated 13.11.2008 made in writ petition No. 14153/2008 staying all further proceedings impugned in the above writ petition dated 5.11.2008 initiated under Section 63(11) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') on the ground that the same cannot be resorted to, in view of Section 63(10) of the Act, particularly with reference to Section 2(AA) of the Act which are referred to as hereunder:Sectlon-2(AA) -Director of Co-operative Audit, Additional Director of Co-operative Audit, Joint Directors of Co-operative Audit, Deputy Directors of Co-operative Audit and Assistant Directors of Co-operative Audit:(1) The St...
Tag this Judgment!B.P. Girish Managing Trustee Sri Someshwara Devaru Temple (Private Tem ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-26-2008
Reported in: ILR2009KAR708; 2009(3)KarLJ550:2009(1)KCCR278:AIR2009NOC1936
ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. Though the writ petition is listed for orders, by consent of both the parties, the matter is heard finally and is disposed of by this order.2. Father of respondents 3, 4 and 5 namely Sadasliivaiah filed application in Form No. 1 under the provisions of the Karnataka (Religious and Charitable) Inams Abolition Act, 1955 praying for grant of occupancy rights over the land bearing Sy. No. 176, measuring 3 acres 10 gunats and Sy. No. 103, measuring 25 guntas, situated at Betta Alasur Village, Bangalore North Taluk. The said application dated 30.3.1991 was addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore. However, the application came to be transferred to the Land Tribunal Bangalore North Taluk, for disposal. The Land Tribunal after making enquiry, passed the order at Annexure-C, dated 30.12.1992, granting occupancy rights in favour of Sadashivaiah, the applicant. This writ petition is filed questioning the said order dated 30.12.1992, by Sri B.P. Girish, who c...
Tag this Judgment!P. SatyanarayanA. Vs. C.H. JayatherthA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-26-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)KCCR1273
Jawad Rahim, J.1. Convicted accused is in revision against the judgment in Crl.A. 32/06 passed on 28.6.2006 confirming the judgment in C.C. 1871/05 passed on 10.2.2006 on the file of Judicial Magistrate First Class-II, Davanagere, convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, referred to the Act).2. Heard both sides.3. The relevant facts for consideration are:a) Respondent herein sought prosecution of the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Act on the premise that he had borrowed from him Rs.2,00,000/- in April 2004 and towards repayment of the said amount, issued cheque on 6.12.2004; the cheque was presented on 24.2.2005 to the Bank, but was returned with the endorsement dated 25.4.2005 as `Account closed'; statutory notice was issued to the in through certificate of posting and also by registered post; the registered cover was returned unclaimed, but the notice through certificate of posting was ...
Tag this Judgment!M. Puttaswamy Vs. State of Karnataka Represented by Its Secretary, Rev ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-25-2008
Reported in: ILR2009KAR94; 2009(4)KarLJ356:2009(1)KCCR676:2009(2)AIRKarR91:2009CriLJNOC427.
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, a Senior Sub-Registrar in the Department of Registration and Stamps, Government of Karnataka, was discharging duties in the sub-registry of Bangalore North Taluk along with two other senior Sub-Registrars, during the year 2002. On a complaint of one Shivakumar, Advocate, who, presented for registration two documents on behalf of his clients G Swami and Jayalakshmi, of Yeshwanthpur Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, on 23-10-2002, an F.I.R. was filed by the 3rd respondent-Inspector of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta alleging a demand for payment of illegal gratification by the Senior Sub-Registrars in the Sub-Registry, Bangalore North Taluk. On the very same day, the 3rd respondent laid a trap and the proceedings that followed, led to recovery of the bribe money of Rs. 3,000/- from one Muthurayappa, not an employee of the Sub-Registry but a private person who was in the office of the Sub-Registrar said to have come to collect a copy of the registered do...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Service Tax Vs. Stag Software Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-25-2008
Reported in: 2009[16]STR144
Deepak Verma, J.1. Sri M.V. Chandrashekhara Reddy, learned Counsel appeared on behalf of appellant.2. Heard on the question of admission. Records perused.3. This is an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the order dated 18-1-2008 : 2008 (10) S.T.R. 329 (Tri. - Bang.) passed by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore.4. Respondent herein had filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the order dated 8-3-2007 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore.5. Few facts, materials for deciding the case are mentioned hereunder:Respondent/company is engaged in software development and other software services, more importantly, testing of software during its development. Further, it is not in dispute that it also imparts training in software to its various customers.6. According to the appellant, testing of software is liable to Service Tax under the category of 'Technical Inspection and Certifica...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bhagyamma and ors. Vs. Smt. Ningarama and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-24-2008
Reported in: ILR2009KAR118; 2009(4)KarLJ404; 2009(1)KCCR410; 2009(4)KLJ404; 2009(2)AIRKarR14; AIR2009NOC1272.
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties.2. The facts as are necessary for the disposal of the present appeal are as follows:The appellants herein were the plaintiffs before the trial court and the respondents were the defendants. They are referred to as plaintiffs and defendants, respectively, herein, for convenience. The suit was for partition and separate possession of the plaintiffs' 4/5th share in the suit schedule properties and consequential reliefs. The plaintiffs claimed that their father, Sannappa, died about 13 years prior to the suit, leaving behind the first defendant, their mother, and the plaintiffs to succeed to his estate, as he had no male issues. It is the case of the plaintiffs that they were each entitled to an equal share, along with the first defendant to the same. It was alleged that the first defendant had sold item No. 1 of the suit schedule properties in favour of the second defendant, which was not in the interest of the plaintiffs and it was ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »