Karnataka Court January 2009 Judgments

The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. H.R. Ab ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010ACJ351; 2009(4)KarLJ151

K.L. Manjunath, J.1. Though the matter is listed for admission, by consent of the parties appeal is heard on merits.2. This appeal is by the Insurance Company challenging the award passed by the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation, Chitradurga in WCA/CR No. 22 of 2003, dated 28-12-2005. Aforesaid claim petition was lodged by respondents 1 and 2 claiming compensation on account of the death of their son one Jeharuddin. According to them, their son Jeharuddin was working as driver in lorry No. CNT-8911 under respondent 3. On 6-11-2002 he was proceeding in the lorry as a driver from Mysore to Gulbarga which vehicle met with an accident in between Hiriyur and Huliyar at about 1.30 a.m. in the early morning on account of the rash and negligent driving of the deceased driver lorry toppled down as a result of which cleaner sustained injuries and lodged a complaint before the police about the accident. Driver was not traced. On 11-11-2002 very near to the spot of the accident a dead body wa...

A Himavardhana Naidu S/O Shri A. Narasimhalu Naidu Assistant Mechanica ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KCCRSN190:2009(3)KLJ24:2009(3)AIRKarR167.

ORDERSubhash Badi, J.1. These two Writ Petitions are by the same petitioner. In W.P. No. 40/2007, the petitioner has called in question the endorsements issued by respondent No. 3 dated 7.2.2005 and 9.8.2006 produced at Annexure-J and Annexure-N. In W.P. No. 3284/2008. the petitioner has called in question the endorsements issued by respondent No. 3 therein dated 27.2.2006 and 12.1.2008 produced at Annexure-H and Annexure-L, both issued by respondent No. 3.2. In W.P. No. 40/2007, the grievance of the petitioner is that, his case for promotion to next higher cadre before his juniors are promoted has not been considered and W.P. No. 3284/2008 is against the denial of increments for a period between 14.4.1998 to 19.12.2003.3. Facts in both the writ petitions are identical. Hence, both these writ petitions are disposed of by this common order.4. Petitioner joined the services in the Corporation as an Assistant Mechanical Engineer on 17.3.1988. He was issued with articles of charge on 5.6.1...

Dundayya and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(2)KarLJ578

V. Jagannathan, J.1. This appeal calls in question the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Fast Track Court-I, Belgaum, by which the two accused namely the husband and the mother-in-law of deceased Sunanda, were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In respect of the first offence, six months rigorous imprisonment was imposed and with regard to latter offence under Section 306 of the IPC, the accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of conviction and sentence, the accused have come up before this Court. It has to be said at the outset that out of the two appellants, the 2nd appellant being the mother-in-law of the deceased, died during the pendency of this appeal and therefore appeal stood abated against her, leaving only the husband who is concerned with this appeal.3. The prosecution case in brief is that the deceased Suna...

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Regional Office Rep. by Its As ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR3332; 2009(6)KarLJ697; 2009(6)AIRKarR105(D.B).

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. One Govinda Reddy a passenger in a BTS bus killed in an accident on 13.7.1994 at 11.15 a.m. on account of the collision between BTS bus and the lorry. The wife and children of the deceased filed a petition seeking compensation and have filed an appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.2. The insurer has filed an appeal seeking avoidance of liability on the ground that there was no coverage of policy on the date of the accident. The policy issued is marked at Ex.R.2 w.e.f. zero hours of 14.7.1994 to mid night of 13.7.1995. The insured had paid the premium amount of Rs. 1307/- on 13.7. 1994. The Ex.R. 1 - receipt is issued by the insurer to that effect. The tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 312948/- with interest at 6% p.a. and directed the owner and insurer of the lorry to pay compensation. The occurrence of the accident and negligence of the lorry is not in dispute.3. In the context of the pleadings and evidence of the insurer, the precise question that a...

Bharat Credit Co Operative Society Ltd. Vs. the State of Karnataka Rep ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner in this petition has sought for a direction, directing the second respondent to comply with the attachment order, Annexure-B by deducting the amount from the salary/ allowance of the third respondent and to remit the same to the petitioner until the entire loan is cleared, by enforcing his statutory duty in accordance with the provisions of the Section 34 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.2. The undisputed facts of the case are that, the petitioner is a Credit Co-operative Society Limited, represented by its Secretary and the third respondent has availed the hand loan of Rs 25,000/- from the petitioner's Society and when he has failed to pay the necessary installments regularly, petitioner's society has raised a dispute before the Joint Registrar of the Cooperative Societies, who in turn, has referred the matter to the Arbitrator in Dispute No. JRB:Dis:1078:04-05. The Arbitrator has passed the award on 24.11.2004 vide Annexure-A. Inspite o...

Prahalad Srinivas Devale and ors. Vs. the Model Education Board and or ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR918::2009(4)KCCRSN268.

ORDER  ABDUL NAZEER, J. Orders on I.A.NOs. I/2008 & III/2008 1. Respondent No. 15 has filed the above application for recalling of the order dated 20.2.2008 made in the above case whereby the appeal was compromised by appellant Nos. 1 and 3 and some of the respondents and to restore the appeal for disposal according to law.  2. This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree in O.S.No. 1/2001 dated 20.12.2003 passed by the Principal District Judge, Dharwad. The first appellant was plaintiff No. 1 and the third appellant was plaintiff No. 8 in the said suit. Appellant Nos. 2 and 4 are deleted since they are no more. The suit filed by the plaintiffs was a representative suit. Some of the respondents were defendants in the said suit and the other respondents were the plaintiffs. The court below by the impugned judgment and decree has framed a scheme known as “Scheme for Management of Model Education Board”, Navalgund, Dharwad District. The applicant in I.A.No. ...

Deccan Aviation Limited (Since Renamed Kingfisher Airlines Limited) Vs ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2009]150CompCas90(Kar); 2009(3)KarLJ219

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. These applications are disposed of by this common order.2. The facts and circumstances as urged by (he respective parties may briefly be stated as follows:In Company application CA 860/2008 it is contended thus: Three Companies, namely, M/s Deccan Aviation Limited (Hereinafter called 'DAL'), M/s Kingfisher Airlines Limited (Hereinafter called 'KAL') and M/s Deccan Charters Limited (Hereinafter called 'DCL') had together sought the sanction of a Composite Scheme of Arrangement under Section 391 and other provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (Hereinafter called the 'Act'), by this Court. The Scheme was duly sanctioned by an order dated 16.6.2008.The object of the Scheme was the consolidation of two commercial airline businesses in a single entity to achieve greater competitive business in the scale and scope of operations. And in order to optimize costs and achieve operational synergies.In terms of the Scheme, the applicant DAL is now known as KAL3. It is stal...

Smt. Nagarathna Vs. State by Gangammanagudi Police

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009CriLJ2612; 2009(2)KarLJ564

ORDER1. This Court has received an unusual request from a female convict-Smt. Nagarathna, whose conviction and sentence of imprisonment for life along with other punishments, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B, 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is pending consideration before this Court in this appeal.2. The request of the convict/appellant is to permit her to withdraw the appeal unconditionally. Last week a similar request was made by another female Smt. Mamatha, who is appellant 2 (along with her husband appellant 1) in another independent Criminal Appeal No. 453 of 2008. In that case also, the convict/appellant had made a similar prayer to withdraw the appeal only so far as she is concerned.3. Considering this prayer of Smt. Mamatha as strange especially the emphatic words in the application sent through the jail to the registry of this Court, that she is voluntarily seeking the withdrawal of her appeal and there is no pressure or force from...

Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Formerly Bharti Tele Ventures Ltd.) Rep. by Its He ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2009)22VST465(Karn); 2009(3)AIRKarR235(D.B)

Arali Nagaraj, J.1. The appellant herein namely Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Formerly M/s. Bharti Televentures Ltd.,) has challenged the order dated: 16.03.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No. 1537/07 (T-RES) declining to interfere with and quash the order of Re-assessment dated 12.01.2007 passed by the 3rd respondent - Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Audit-42, DVO-4, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the 'Assessing Authority' for short) and consequent 12 notices of demand issued by him for the months of April 2005 to March 2006 demanding the tax from the appellant - company quantified thereunder. The learned Single Judge declined to interfere with and quash the said order and notices on the ground that the Appellant did not avail the statutory remedy provided under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the ( 'KVAT Act' for short). Therefore, the appellant has also challenged the legality and correctness of the said order of re...

Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Wipro Ltd.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2009]319ITR156(KAR); [2009]319ITR156(Karn)

Deepak Verma, J.1. Sri Arvind, learned Counsel appeared on behalf of the appellants and Miss Saina Mary Thomas, learned Counsel appeared for the respondent.2. Heard on admission. Records perused.3. The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the order dated July 31, 2002, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, in Appeal I. T. A. No. 296/Bang/2001 for the assessment year 1999-2000.4. The appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:(a) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee-company was not liable to deduct TDS under Section 192 of the Act over the issue of its shares under a stock option plan to its employees at a concessional rate as it cannot be treated as a perquisite (salary) and, therefore, the assessee cannot be treated as a defaulter under Section 201(1) of the Act and consequently no interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act can be levied ?(b) Whether the Tribunal was corr...