Karnataka Court June 2008 Judgments
Krishnendu Halder S/O Sushanta Halder Vs. Visvesvaraya Technological U ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-24-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)KCCRSN248
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. Petitioner is a student presently studying in the 1st semester of Bachelor of Engineering (BE) course in Information Science and Engineering in the 3rd respondent-College. He is admitted to the BE course during the academic year 2007-08. He claims to belong to scheduled caste community of 'MALO' in the State of West Bengal Petitioner has passed his plus-two examination of the West Bengal Council of Higher Secondary Education during 2007 securing in all 132 marks out of 300 in the elective subjects. The break-up of marks obtained by him is Physics 41, Maths 44, Chemistry 47. Thus, in the optional subjects, he has secured overall 44% marks.2. The 3rd respondent college sought for approval of admission of the petitioner from the 1st respondent-University. The University issued communications dated 27.12.2007 and 07.12.2007 vide Annexures M and K respectively informing that admission of petitioner was not approved as the marks obtained by him in the optional subjects ...
Tag this Judgment!Kotrabasappa a/F Kotrappa Hubballi Vs. the Karnataka Housing Board by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR3704; 2009(1)KarLJ129
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. The challenge in this writ petition is against the order dated 19.09.2007 passed by the District Judge, Gadag, in Misc. No. 8/2006. By the said order, the learned District Judge has rejected the petition filed by the petitioner herein Under Section 152 of CPC seeking correction of a clerical and arithmetic mistake in the decree passed in M.A. No. 147/89.2. Petitioner was the owner of land bearing R.S. No. 201 measuring 3 acres 17 guntas. The said land was acquired by the 2nd respondent. On an application filed Under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short 'the Act') the matter was referred for adjudication of the market value payable to the Civil Court, Gadag. By a judgment and award dated 02.02.1983 made in L.A.C. No. 13/1981, the Civil Court determined the market value at Rs. 7,000/- per acre and awarded interest as admissible Under Section 28 of the Act. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded the petitioner-land owner preferred an app...
Tag this Judgment!Vani P.R. D/O Ramachandra Rao Vs. State of Karnataka by Its Chief Secr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)KarLJ311; 2008(6)KLJ311; 2008(4)KCCRSN252; 2008(5)AIRKarR385; AIR2008NOC2791
ORDERB.V. Nagarathna, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the letter dated 16.8.2005 (Annexure-K) issued by the 4th respondent cancelling the admission of the petitioner for B.Ed. Course and has also sought a declaration that Rule 3(2)(a) of the Karnataka Selection of Candidates for admission to Teacher Certificate Higher Course (TCH) and Bachelor of Education Course (B.Ed.) Rules, 1999 (for short '1999 Rules') as being violative of the Constitution and a direction to the respondents to admit the petitioner for B.Ed. course and a further direction to the respondents to include Linguistics, Journalism and other subjects as eligible Elective Subjects for admission to B.Ed. course by effecting necessary amendments to the 1999 Rules.2. According to the petitioner, she is a B.A. degree holder from Kuvempu University with elective subjects of Journalism, Linguistics and English. She completed her B.A. degree examination from the 4th respondent-University in the year 199...
Tag this Judgment!T.P. Lakshmi Narasamma Vs. Rajalakshmi and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR3835
ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. Petitioner herein is the landlord of the premises in question, of in question is a residential premises. The petitioner-widow purchased the premises in the year 2000. She filed H.R.C. Petition No. 229/2004, for evicting the respondents under Section 31(1)(a) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). The memorandum of the petition discloses that the petition schedule premises was let out by the previous owner B.N. Srinivasa to S.M. Reddy and after the death of S.M. Reddy, his legal representatives continued as tenants of the premises. After the purchase of the property by the petitioner, the respondents allegedly not paid the rents. It is further pleaded that the petitioner is the widow and she requires the petition schedule premises for the bona fide use and occupation of her and her family members.In response to the notice, the respondents appeared through their advocate. But, they did not file the affidavit stati...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Kallappa Makavi Vs. Madan Bindurao Desai and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ224; ILR2008KAR3922; ILR2008(3)Kar3922; 2008(6)KLJ442; 2008(4)KCCR2173
ORDERR.B. Naik, J.1. The petitioner/accused is convicted for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and is sentenced to undergo S.I for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer S.I for two months and further he is directed to pay compensation of Rs. 2,12,000/- to the complainant by an order of conviction and sentence dated 22-5-2004 passed by the II Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) JMFC III Court, Hubli in C.C. No. 755/1993. The said order of conviction and sentence is confirmed by judgment dated 7-11-2005 passed by the Presiding Officer Fast Track Court-II Dharwad, sitting at Hubli in Crl.A. No. 26/2004.2. The respondent/complainant had given a hand loan of a sum of Rs. 2,12,000/- to the petitioner/accused herein on 1 -12-1990 for the purpose of augmenting his business. Towards the discharge of part of his liability, the petitioner/accused had issued a cheque in a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 10-12-1991. The same on presentation was...
Tag this Judgment!Mangalore Catholic Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Regional Transport Offic ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Kant13; 2009(1)KCCR218; 2009(1)AIRKarR14; AIR2009Kar13
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition by a financier-banker who had financed certain amount for the purchase of a motor vehicle registered in the name of third respondent. It appears that the third respondent defaulted in payment of instalments due to the petitioner-bank and the petitioner-bank re-possessed the vehicle on 31-12-2002 for the reason of realization of its dues from the third respondent.2. A registered motor vehicle has some special qualities. It can be compared to Mithas and affects all those persons who touch the vehicle. Under the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 (for short, the Act), any person who is in possession of a registered motor vehicle will automatically incur liability for payment of motor vehicle tax so long as such registered motor vehicle is possessed by the person. This liability is in addition to the liability fastened on the registered owner of the vehicle.3. The petitioner banker having re-possessed the registered motor vehicle - An ...
Tag this Judgment!Veeranna E.N. Vs. Indian Overseas Bank Rep. by Its General Manager
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2008
Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ165; (2009)ILLJ809Kant:2009(1)AIRKarR349.
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. Mr. M.N. Prasanna, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has raised only two contentions i.e., noncompliance of the Mandatory Regulations 6(15) and 6(17) of the Indian Overseas Bank Officer Employees' Conduct and Discipline & Appeal Regulations, 1976 (for short 'Regulations'). The main thrust of his argument is that there is a clear violation of the Regulations inasmuch as Regulation 6(17) has not been scrupulously followed.2. Smt. K. Subha Ananthi, learned Counsel appearing for the Bank submits that there is no violation of Regulation 6(17) of the Regulations inasmuch as an opportunity was given to the petitioner and he has filed his' written brief, which would be a sufficient compliance of Regulation 6(17) of the Regulations, which would deal with the major penalties.3. Whether indeed Regulation 6(17) of the Regulations has been scrupulously followed or not as contended by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, few facts are required to be ...
Tag this Judgment!Basreddy and ors. Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-20-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR4158; 2009(3)KarLJ284
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. The four petitioners in this writ petition are challenging the notices dated 10.03.2005 issued under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act'). Copies of the impugned notices are produced at Annexures-B, C, D and E. The said notices are assailed only to the extent they purport to deduct 25% of the amount of compensation payable to the petitioners allegedly towards the depreciation charges of the buildings acquired. Petitioners have further sought for a direction to the respondent-Special Land Acquisition Officer to pay the amount as per the award passed together with all the statutory benefits.2. It is the case of the petitioners that the buildings constructed by them in the properties owned by them were acquired for the purpose of constructing a canal. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Karanja Project, Bidar passed an award vide Annexure-A determining compensation for the acquired properties. The names of the four petitioners including t...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Devaki and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-20-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)KarLJ514; 2008(3)KCCR2070
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioners, being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 8-8-2002 passed by the Land Tribunal, Bantwal, in proceeding No. TNC:8253:74-75 vide Annexure-J, have presented this writ petition. Further, petitioners have sought to direct the Land Tribunal, Bantwal, to grant occupancy rights in favour of the petitioners in respect of Survey No. 473/1D measuring 0.84 cents of Punacha Village, Bantwal Taluk.2. One Sri Late Aithu Naika, husband of the first petitioner and father of petitioners 2 to 4 claiming that he is the tenant in respect of the land in question has filed Form 7 for registration of occupancy rights before the 2nd respondent-Land Tribunal, Bantwal. The Land Tribunal, Bantwal, by its order dated 9-9-1981 has registered the occupancy rights in his favour. Assailing the correctness of the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Bantwal, respondents 3 and 4 herein have filed a writ petition before this Court in No. 31114 of 1981. This Court has allowed the sai...
Tag this Judgment!Sri M.C. Venkatesh Vs. the Tahsildar and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-20-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR4800
ORDERB. Sreenivase Gowda, J.1. The petitioner claims to be purchaser of the land bearing Sy. No. 25/5 measuring 12 guntas situated at Dasanapura village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk has preferred this petition challenging the order Annexure-'C' dated 17/3/2006 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in dismissing his Appeal 81/05 and confirming the order passed by the 2nd respondent-Asst. Commissioner vide Annexure-'B' dated 16/6/2004 whereby the 2nd respondent ordered for resumption of his land in favour of the Government and further directed the Tahsildar to enter the name of the Government in place of the petitioner in the Revenue Records in respect of the said land.2. I have heard Sri. H.C. Shivaramu, Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri R.B. Sathyanarayana Singh, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for Respondents 1 to 2.3. Few facts that are required for disposal of this writ petition are stated as under:The 1st respondent-Tah...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »