Karnataka Court July 2008 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
B.R. Shivarama Reddy S/O Rama Reddy, Since Deceased by His L.Rs. Smt. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-07-2008
Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ657
ORDERB. Sreenivase Gowda, J.1. This writ petition is by the owners of land challenging the order of the 1st respondent-Land Tribunal dated 22/4/2003 passed in Nos. LRF.CR.264'74-75, LRF.CR.290:74-75 & LRF:CR:291:75-75 vide Annexure-'A' declaring certain extent of lands belonging to them as excess lands and ordered for resumption of the same in favour of the Government.2. I have heard Sri S.K. Venkata Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri R.B. Satyanarayana Singh, learned High Court Government: Pleader appearing for the respondents.3. Few facts that are necessary for disposal of this writ petition are as under:Late Sri B.R. Shivarama Reddy, and his two sons viz., Sri B.S. Krishnarjuna Reddy and Sri B.S. Nagarjuna Reddy filed declarations under Sections 66 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') in the prescribed Form No. 11 as per Annexures-B, C and D to the 1' respondent-Land Tribunal for declaration of the extent of lands held by th...
Smt. Nagaratna W/O. Ramanaik Vs. the Election Officer, Jadkal Gram Pan ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)KarLJ116; 2008(4)KCCRSN289; 2008(5)AIRKarR478; AIR2008NOC2804; ILR2008(3)Kar3949
ORDERA.S. Pachhapure, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dt 18.02.2006 passed by the II Addl Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC, Kundapura, declaring the election of the petitioner as void and that the Respondent No. 2 is duly elected candidate in the Panchayath elections held on 27.2.2005.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this petition are as under:The elections to Mudur Grama Panchayath were held on 27.2.2005. There were four wards within the limits of the Grama Panchayath and out of which, Ward No. II was reserved for General Category (Woman). The petitioner and the Respondent No. 2 were the rival contestants.3. After the elections, the counting of votes was held on 1.3.2005 and the results were certified in Form No. 36 under Rule 74(2)(c) of the Karnataka Panchayath Raj (Conduct of Election) Rules, 1993 (hereinafter called as the Rules) and the petitioner before this Court having secured 359 votes was declared elected from Ward No. II, whereas the Respondent...
The Bidar District Central Co-op Bank Limited Represented by Its Manag ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR3830; 2009(1)KarLJ231:2009(1)AIRKarR481
ORDERK. Bhakthavatsala, J.1. The petitioner/Co-operative Bank is before this Court praying for quashing the impugned order dated 18.7.2006 on the file of respondent No. 1 at Annexure-D.2. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the Petition may be stated as under:The respondent No. 2 filed a complaint dated 26.4.2006 (Annexure-A) under Section 18(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short, 'the Act') before the Karnataka Information Commission/respondent No. 1 seeking information regarding:(a) the names of the borrowers, who have opted for one time settlement in the last five years and(b) the names of he 160 employees appointed during the year 2005-06.The petitioner/Bank filed objections to the complaint stating that the complainant is neither a Director nor a Member of the petitioner/Bank and the Bank is not a 'Public Authority' and there was no obligation on the petitioner/Bank to give the information as sought for by respondent No. 2. It is also stated that the ...
India Heritage Foundation Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: (2008)18VST376(Karn)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. The writ petitioner is a trust owning certain properties which it appears it is developing for putting up certain structures.2. It is claimed that the buildings constructed in the form of flats are being sold to the members or the beneficiaries of the petitioner-trust. It is in the context of this activity that the petitioner appears to have filed a 'nil' return of liability under the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short, 'the Act') for the months October, November and December, 2006.3. The controversy in the writ petition relates to filing of this 'nil' return as in the view of the respondents-officials of the commercial taxes department, the petitioner was liable to pay the tax as a dealer in respect of the sale transactions with its members which form part of the turnover.4. The authorities it appears were not in agreement with the claim of the petitioner that it is not liable to tax and file 'nil' return for the reason tha...
State Bank of Mysore Rep. by Its Chief Manager, Personnel, Sri. G. Raj ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)AIRKarR90
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. In these two writ petitions, petitioners are banking institutions. In writ petition No. 36339 of 2003, M/s. State Bank of Mysore, a subsidiary of State Bank of India is the writ petitioner and is an institution which is governed by the State Bank of India [Subsidiary Banks] Act, 1959 [for short 'subsidiary Act']. In writ petition No. 37366 of 2003, M/s. Vijaya Bank, a Nationalized Bank under the provisions of the Banking Companies [Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings] Act, 1980 [for short 'Acquisition Act, 1980'] and is identified under the provisions of the Acquisition Act, 1980 as a 'corresponding new bank' as defined in terms of Section 2[b] of the Acquisition Act, 1980.2. Writ petitioners are before this court in the context of the liability fastened on them under the provisions of the Karnataka Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employment Act, 1976 [for short the 'Act'].3. Though on facts, the position of the two petitioners slightly dif...
Associated Managements of Primary and Secondary Schools in Karnataka V ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: AIR2008NOC2790(FB); ILR2008(3)KAR2895; 2008(4)KarLJ593; 2008(4)KLJ593; 2008(5)AIRKarR261; AIR2008NOC2790(FB)
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The destiny of India is now being shaped in her classrooms. In a world based on science and technology it is education that determines the level of prosperity, welfare and security of the people. On the quality and number of persons coming out of our schools and colleges will depend our success in the great enterprise of national reconstruction whose principal objective is to raise the standard of living of our people. The task is neither unique nor is it quite new. But its magnitude, gravity and urgency have increased immensely and it has acquired a new meaning and importance in the context of liberalisation, globalisation and privatisation. If the pace of national development is to be accelerated there is need for a well defined, bold and imaginative educational policy and for determined and vigorous action to vitalize, improve and expand education.2. Education is to be used as a powerful instrument of social, economic and political change and therefore has to be ...
B. Mruthyunjayappa S/O. Mallappa and B.M. Somashekarappa S/O. Mruthyun ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR4987; 2008(6)AIRKarR182
ORDERArali Nagaraj, J.1. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 herein, who are respectively defendants-1 and 2 in O.S. No. 127/07 have challenged the order dated 8.2.08 passed in the said case by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM., Chitradurga (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned Judge' for short) rejecting the application of these petitioners filed under Order 7 Rule 11(a) and (d) CPC seeking rejection of plaint in the said case. Though this matter is listed for admission it is taken up for final disposal by consent of the learned advocates for both the sides and their arguments are heard. All the documents produced by the respective parties to this revision petition and also the impugned order are perused.2. Stated in brief the facts leading to the present revision petition are as under:(a) The first petitioner herein namely B. Mruthyunjayappa filed O.S. No. 179/96 against respondent No. 2 Basappa seeking declaration that he has been the absolute owner of a portion of the land Sy. No. 2...
Karnataka Religious and Linguistic Minority Professional Colleges Asso ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: ILR2009KAR216; 2009(3)KCCRSN167(D.B).
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. In these Writ Petitions, 5 students have approached this Court asserting common facts and raising common questions of law. Hence, all these petitions are heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. In fact, these Writ Petitions were listed before the learned Single Judge of this Court and an Interim Order directing provisional admission of the students for the various Post Graduate courses in Dental Sciences has been passed on 31.05.2007. Challenging the said Interim Order, the Karnataka Religious & Linguistic Minority Professional Colleges Association and as also the Principal, Oxford Dental College and Research Centre, Bangalore filed two separate Writ Appeals, in W.A. No. 1032/2007 and 1046/2007. In the course of hearing of the said Appeals, it was felt that the questions raised for consideration in the Writ Appeals virtually result in considering the questions raised in the Writ Petitions. Hence, for the purpose of effective and final adjudicat...
P.R. Ramesh S/O Late P. Rudra Murthy Vs. State of Karnataka by Chief S ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Kant10; 2009(1)KarLJ328
B.S. Patil, J.1. These writ petitions are filed as Public Interest Litigations seeking a direction to the respondents herein to announce the calendar of events to hold elections to the 3rd respondent Bangalore Mahanagara Palike forthwith and to quash the Notification issued appointing the Administrator for the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike.2. Petitioner in W.P. No. 15482/2006 Sri P.R. Ramesh is an Ex-Councilor, He was elected to the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike as a Councilor in the elections held on 11.11.2001 for a term of 5 years which has ended on 23.11.2006. He was also elected as the Mayor of Bangalore City Corporation on 28.11.2003 and his term came to an end on 21.11.2005. As respondents 1 and 2 did not hold elections to Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Bangalore, before the expiry of its term on 23.11.2006 after completion of five years and as no steps were taken by respondents 1 and 2 to commence delimitation of wards and allocation of reservation to different wards in Bangalore Cit...
Jayakanth Vs. State of Karnataka by J.P. Nagara Police Station, by Pub ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1224; ILR2008KAR5197
ORDERA.S. Pachhapure, J.1. The petitioner has challenged his conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC on a trial held by the Addl. C.M.M., Bangalore, and confirmed by the Fast Track Court, Bangalore, in Crl.A. No. 386/2005.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of the petition are as under:Shilpa Rani [P.W.3] is the resident of J.P. Nagar, Bangalore, and is the sister of Vinod Kumar [P.W.I ]. The husband of Shilpa Rani was working in Tumkur and on 27.05.2001 at 5.30 p.m., she had gone to dental clinic along with her brother P.W. 1 and while they were returning, at J.P. Nagar turning point, it is alleged that the petitioner/accused blinked his eye and asked her to accompany him. She got angry and asked him whether he has no sense of humanity and showed her leg and chappal. The petitioner enraged, came near her suddenly, pulled her stole calling her as a beautiful lady. He also threatened her to kidnap and deface by pouring acid. He abused her in filthy lan...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »