Karnataka Court February 2009 Judgments
Sri M.A. Parthasarathy S/O Late M.A. Srinivasan Vs. the Spl. Deputy Co ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-17-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ203
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition for a declaration that, the report submitted by the Karnataka Lokayuktha as per Annexure-F is void, nonest and has no probative value and for quashing Annexure- G i.e., a notice under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka land Revenue Act, issued by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District.2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the property bearing No. 1, 12th Cross, Rajamahal Vilas Extension, Sadashivnagar, Bangalore - 560080, which is a part of 10 acres 28 guntas of land which has been purchased by the petitioner's father late M.A. Srinivasan from the erstwhile Maharaja of Mysore in the year 1953-34 has been in lawful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner and his family members for the last over 52 years uninterruptedly. Petitioner's father late M.A. Srinivasan, died in the year 1998 at his ripe old age of 101. He was the Pradhan of the erstwhile State of Mysore, the Divan of the erstwhile State of Gwal...
Tag this Judgment!H.K. Shekar Vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-17-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ155; 2009(3)KCCR1928; 2009(4)AIRKarR124(D.B)
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. The appellant was appointed as a conductor on daily wage basis during the year 194 and his name was sponsored by the employment exchange,2. It is the case of the appellant-writ petitioner that Articles of Charges were issued to him on 18-11-1998 alleging that he had failed to issue tickets to 2 passengers and no fare was collected and that he had not issued tickets to six passengers though he had collected the requisite fare of Rs. 15/- from them. The appellant-writ petitioner submitted his explanation denying the . allegations levelled against him. The respondent not being satisfied by the explanation, appointed an Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer held an enquiry and submitted his report on 27-12-1999 holding that the charges levelled against the appellant-writ petitioner were established. The respondent withdrew the said proceedings by endorsement dated 24-7-2002 and issued one more charge-sheet making identical allegations against the appellant-writ petiti...
Tag this Judgment!P. Channabasavaiah Vs. the Divisional Controller, Karnataka State Road ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-17-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ172; 2009(3)KCCR1925; 2009(4)AIRKarR238(D.B)
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. The appellant in this writ appeal was working as a conductor in Channapatna Depot of Bangalore Rural Division. While he was conducting the bus on the route Kanakapura to Therubeedi on 13-6-2001, the vehicle was checked by the checking staff near Dodda Maralawadi at 8.35 a.m. and found that out of the 46 adults and 20 children travelling in the bus, the appellant had failed to issue tickets to 19 children travelling from Mallige Metlu to Dodda Maralawadi despite collecting the requisite fare of Re. 1/- each and further alleged that the appellant had neither collected the fare nor issued tickets to two passengers travelling from Agara to Dodda Maralawadi. The appellant submitted his reply denying the entire allegations.2. An enquiry was initiated against the appellant by order dated 14-8-2001. The Enquiry Officer held the appellant guilty of the charges levelled against him and dismissed him from service.3. Challenging the said order of dismissal, the appellant fil...
Tag this Judgment!S. Govindaraju Vs. the Divisional Controller, Bangalore Metropolitan T ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-17-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ325; 2009(3)KCCR1592; 2009(4)AIRKarR134(D.B)
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. The appellant was appointed as a 'Badli' conductor in the respondent-Corporation during the year 1984. His services came to be terminated by holding that his record of service was not satisfactory and therefore, his name was removed from the select list as per order dated 2/4-5-1985 and the said order was challenged by the appellant-petitioner in Writ Petition No. 9171 of 1985 which culminated in the order dated 15th April, 1986 made in Civil Appeal No. 1339 of 1986, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court set aside the order of termination on the ground that the removal of the name of the appellant from the select list was punitive in nature and therefore, he should have been given an opportunity to put forth his case. The appellant was reinstated into service pursuant to the said order.2. Thereafter, the respondent served a charge-sheet on the appellant alleging the following charges.a. That, the first party had failed to issue tickets to three passengers travelling ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Giddamma and anr. Vs. Smt. Venkatamma, (Dead by Lrs) and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR992; 2009(4)KarLJ696
Venugopala Gowda, J.1. This appeal arises from a suit for partition brought against the appellants by the respondent and another in the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Kolar. Defendants in the suit are the appellants and respondent (dead) represented by her legal representatives, was the 1st plaintiff. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to hereinafter, with reference to their rank in the suit.2. The material facts in regard to the relationship of the parties, which are not in dispute are that, one Muniyappa and his wife Nasamma, who have died, have left behind three daughters namely, (1) Venkatamma (1st plaintiff) (2) Chinnamma (2nd plaintiff) and (3) Giddamma (1st defendant). Said Venkatamma and Chinnamma filed the suit for a decree of partition and separate possession of their 2/3rd share in the plaint schedule property against their sister Giddamma and her son B. Nanjappa, inter alia contending that, the second defendant is attempting to alienate the...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. B. Jayaram and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ33; 2009(4)AIRKarR180; AIR2009Kar2442(D.B)
P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. These two appeals are directed the against the orders dated 1st March, 2007 made in Writ Petition Nos. 44229 and 42358 of 2003 laid by the respondents herein respectively.2. The respondents-writ petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 44229 and 42358 of 2003 have sought for the following reliefs:(a) Issue a appropriate writ/order/direction upon the respondents not to deny the petitioner before this Court the facility of First Class Season Ticket to travel between Mysore-Bangalore/Bangalore-Mysore which is within 150 kms. distance as permitted by the Indian Railway Administration all over India;(b) Issue an appropriate writ/order to prohibit any of the respondents from citing the Rules of IRCA (Indian Railway Conference Association) mentioned in Annexure-E, dated 14-12-2000 and IRCA is neither the Railway Administration for State under Article 12 of the Constitution;(c) In terms of Sections 50 and 51(2) of the Railways Act, 1989 permit the First Class Season Ticket hold...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. A. Bhagyamma and anr. Vs. Bangalore Development Authority
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR2747; 2009(4)KarLJ509
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. Site bearing No. 256 ad measuring 20' x 25' of Sonnenahalli further extension, Bangalore was allotted in favour of one Abdul Aleem. A lease-cum-sale agreement was also executed on 2nd February, 1988. He was also put in possession pursuant to a Possession Certificate dated 23-4-1988.2. The case of the petitioners is that the said Abdul Aleem was in financial difficulty and offered to sell the property to the 2nd petitioner i.e., the husband of the 1st petitioner on 19-2-1988 for a consideration. He received more than 80% of the sale consideration on the date of execution of the sale agreement. He has also put the purchaser in possession of the schedule property and has delivered all the original documents issued by the respondent to the said Abdul Aleem. The balance of sale consideration was also paid. Hence, Abdul Aleem executed a registered General Power of Attorney on 28-4-1988 appointing the 2nd petitioner as his lawful attorney to deal with the schedule pr...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Surinder Kaur Nayak and anr. Vs. Chief Personnel Manager, Syndica ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-13-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR1125; 2010(1)KarLJ234; (2010)ILLJ313Kant:2009(4)KCCRSN297:2009(4)AIRKarR379.
ORDERS. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. The first petitioner is the widow of A.Y. Nayak, an Employee of first respondent-Bank and the second petitioner is their son. A.Y. Nayak died in harness on 9.8.1997. In this case, petitioners have questioned the validity of the order at Annexure 'A', dated 24.4.2003, whereby the representation filed by them seeking grant of monetary benefits and family pension to the first petitioner has been rejected by the Bank.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:A.Y. Nayak was working as a Branch Manager, Bhartan Bazaar Branch, Moradabad, of the respondent-Bank in the year 1984-85. While he was working as such, a charge memo dated 25.8.1986 was served on him accusing him of violating Regulation 3(1) of the Syndicate Bank Officers Employees (Conduct Regulation) 1976 read with Section 24 of the Regulations. He filed the reply denying the allegations contained in the charge memo. The Disciplinary Authority not being satisfied with the explanation offered by the deli...
Tag this Judgment!South Indian Sugar Mills Association by Its Secretary, Sri K. Ranganat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-13-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR2216; 2009(5)KarLJ302:2009(3)KCCR18242009(5)AIRKarR232:AIR2009NOC2878
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The petitioners in these two Writ Petitions have challenged the order of the Government of Karnataka dated 31.3.2008 where the Commissioner for Cane Development and Director of Sugar in Karnataka has requested all the Deputy Commissioners to ensure that the additional sugar cane price of Rs. 160/- per Metric Ton in addition to the Statutory Minimum Price determined by the Government of India is to be paid to the farmers for the crane crushed during the year 2007-08.2. The Central Government has fixed the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) of sugarcane payable by sugar factories for 2007-08 sugar season at Rs. 81.18 per quintal linked to a basic recovery of 9% subject to a premium of Rs. 0.90 for every 0.1% point increase in the recovery above that level. In so far as the Karnataka State is concerned the minimum sugarcane price depending upon recovery percentage it works out to Rs. 105,48 to 81,18 depending upon the place. After the announcement of the said Statutory Mini...
Tag this Judgment!Patric John (Since Deceased) by L.Rs Vs. Somashekhar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-13-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ345
ORDERSubhash B. Adi, J.1. In exercise of power conferred under Section 9 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, learned Single Judge by his order dated 8th August, 2003 has referred the revision petition to the Division Bench.2. During the course of the hearing of the revision petition by the learned Single Judge, Counsel appearing for the tenant cited a decision in the matter of Smt. Sunddri Acharthi v. N. Shankara Bangera : 2003 (2) Kar. L.J. 181 : ILR 2002 Kar. 4746 and contended that, the provisions of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are not applicable to the pending proceedings. On the other hand, Counsel appearing for the landlord cited a decision of this Court in the matter of Smt. Thilothamma and Anr. v. Smt. Rahmathunnisa : 2002 (6) Kar. L.J. 368 : ILR 2002 Kar. 4846 and submitted that, the provisions of the Act would also govern the pending proceedings. The learned Single Judge found that, there is a conflictive view taken by this Court in ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »