Karnataka Court April 2009 Judgments

In Re: Lotus Bio Analytical Services (P.) Ltd.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2009]94SCL138(Kar)

ORDERH.G. Ramesh, J.1. In both these petitions filed under Sections 391 - 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, the petitioner-Companies viz., Lotus Bio Analytical Services Private Limited (transferor company) and Lotus Labs Private Limited (transferee company) have sought for sanction of the scheme of amalgamation, which is at Annexure-A so as to be binding on them, their shareholders and creditors. Accordingly, they are disposed of by this common order.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-companies submits that this Court by its separate orders dated 22-10-2008, copies of which are produced at Anncxure-F in both the petitions, had dispensed with the meetings of the shareholders and the creditors relating to consideration of the scheme of amalgamation. Learned Counsel submits that the shareholders and the creditors of the petitioner-Companies have given consent to the scheme of amalgamation at Annexure-A and accordingly prays for sanction of the scheme.3. Learned Counsel appearin...

U.M. Suresh Rao S/O Late B.A. Mudannaya Vs. State of Karnataka Departm ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. This application is by the 5th respondent to vacate or modify the interim order dated 26-3-2009.2. By the interim order, the applicant is directed not to put to use the property No 370, 11th main, 3rd block, Koramangala, Bangalore for any purpose other than residential3. The petitioner claims to be the owner in occupation of the residential building bearing No 369, Koramangala, opposite to the property in question, in an area classified as residential, in the Comprehensive Development Plan, under The Karnataka Town and Country Development Act 1961, for short KTCP Act. The property, in question, being a corner plot had no opening on the Sarjapur Road but entrance from the 11th, main, opposite the petitioner's residence. The 4th respondeat, the owner of the said property, obtained a sanction of a building plan and having erected a residential building, put to use the same for a residence.4. The revised Master Plan 2015, and the Zonal Regulations 2007, for short...

M.R.K. Rao S/O Late N.S. Rajgopal Rao and ors. Vs. Corporation of City ...

Court: Karnataka

Ashok B. Hinchigeri, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment, order and decree passed by the Court of XVI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City in O.S. No. 1869/1985.2. This is a third Regular First Appeal arising from O.S. No. 1869/1985. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are the legal heirs of one M.S. Rajagopal Rao, who is the absolute owner of the schedule property. For the formation of the road, the respondent - Corporation occupied almost half of the schedule property - 65' X 30'. The appellants ventilated their grievance contending that the part of the schedule property occupied for the formation of road is neither acquired nor purchased from the appellants. They prayed for the judgment and decree of permanent injunction restraining the Corporation from encroaching on the schedule property and for mandatory injunction directing them to deviate the road from the schedule property. By its order, dt. 28.08.1900, the suit was dismissed. 'T...

Rangegowda S/O. Ningegowde Vs. Khalimulia S/O. Bashasaab and the Unite ...

Court: Karnataka

1. The claimant has preferred this appeal, challenging the Judgment and Award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, seeking enhancement of compensation for the personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident.2. The parties are referred to as they were referred in the original proceedings, for the purpose of convenience.3. On 29.07.2006 at about 5.45 p.m. the claimant was travelling in an autorickshaw bearing reg. No. MYH 6189 along with others. When he came near Lalanakere-Chagachagere, the driver of the said autorickshaw drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. As a. result, the autorickshaw capsized causing grievous injuries to the inmates of the autorickshaw. The claimant was also injured. He sustained fracture of left tibia and fibula. He was immediately admitted to hospital, where he was operated. Thereafter, he preferred the claim petition seeking compensation.4. After service of not ice, the respondents entered appearance and filed a detailed statement of objec...

Devaraju S/O Late Desigowda and Smt. Ningamma W/O Late Desigowda Vs. S ...

Court: Karnataka

N. Kumar, J.1. The appellants have preferred this second appeal against the concurrent finding recorded by the Courts below that the plaintiff is to be paid maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per mouth and her daughter is to be paid maintenance of Rs. 400/- per month from the date of the suit till she attains majority.2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit.3. First plaintiff-Chandramma is the wife of Devaraju. Second plaintiff is the child born to her. Second defendant is the mother of first defendant. When the first defendant failed and neglected to maintain his wife and daughter, they were constrained to file the suit O.S. No, 81/2002 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn) & JMFC, Channapatna, for a decree of maintenance and for creating a charge on the property which is standing in the name of the defendants which is a joint family property. In fact proceedings were initiated under Section 498A and 506 of the I...

P. Thimmanaiak and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ173; 2009(3)KCCRSN102; 2009(5)AIRKarR121; AIR2009NOC2658

P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. Since both the appeals arise out of a common order dated 18th June, 2008 made in W.P. No. 17199 of 2005 connected with W.P. Nos. 22999 of 2005 and 545 of 2006, by consent both the appeals are heard and disposed of together.2. The unsuccessful writ petitioners are appellants herein. For the purpose of convenience the parties are arrayed as per the ranking in the writ petition.3. In the writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the cancellation of the allotment of sites to the petitioners who claim to be landless, by proceedings dated 5th September, 2005 under the following facts and circumstances of the case:The 4th respondent-Grama Panchayat issued a public notice on 9th November, 1998 proposing to dispose of certain sites belonging to the Grama Panchayat, to which, the petitioners offered the highest bid. Based on the highest bid offered, the Taluk Panchayat by order dated 11th January, 1999 confirmed the bids, but the same came to suspended by the Zilla P...

M. Kokila W/O B. Shanmugam Vs. the State of Karnataka Rep. by Its Secr ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR2583; 2009(6)KarLJ590

1. This Appeal was heard and reserved on 24/3/2008. Since judgment could not be pronounced within three months, in view of the decision of Supreme Court, we got it listed to re-hear this case.2. Today there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. We have perused the order passed by the learned single Judge. There is delay in filing the appeal. I.A.I/2006 is filed to condone the same. Accepting the reasons mentioned and applying the ratio of the decision reported in AIR 2000 SC 2306, we allow I.A.I/2006 and condone the delay.3. The issue involved in this case is, whether the owners of Patta lands on which quarrying activities are being carried on, are required to obtain conversion under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act of 1964, as quarrying of minor mineral is not agricultural operation. The learned single Judge has dismissed a batch of writ petitions, including that of the appellant herein, by the common order under appeal.4. Learned Counsel for the appellant delet...

Deen Mohamed A.R. S/O Abdul Rahim and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Karnataka ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Petitioners in all these writ petitions are market functionaries carrying on their trade in notified agricultural produce, in different Market Committees such as Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Mysore, in Writ Petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 1523-1529/2009 within the market area/yard of Chsllakere Agricultural Produce Market Committee In respect of whom Sri. A.C. Balaraj, Advocate takes notice, so also in Writ Petition Nos. 279/-2800/2009 and connected matters carrying on trade within the area of Chellakere Agricultural Produce Market Committee within the precinct of Chiiradurga Agricultural Produce Market Committee as in the case of writ petitioners in Writ Petition No.4746- 4749/2009 etc,2. Writ Petitioners are all persons who had been allotted sites within the respective market yards to enable them to put up construction and to have their own place of business in the said building and such allotments were made during the period starting from ...

Sharan Rohidas S/O Sadashiva Poojary Vs. the State of Karnataka Throug ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERN. Ananda, J.1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused in Crime No. 56/2008 registered for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 392 IPC.2. The petitioner is in judicial custody. The learned Sessions Judge, had dismissed the application for hail.3. I have heard Sri. K.M. Nataraj, learned Counsel for petitioner arid learned Government Pleader for the State and F hove been taken through records.4. The gist of the first information lodged by Victim is as follows:The; victim is a resident, of Rkknr Village, Kankanady, Mangalore (D.K.). On 9.3.2008 the victim performed the marriage of her daughter - Soumya. On the same day victim decided to go to Manjeshwara. The victim did not inform any of her family members. The victim left, her house at about 11.30 p.m on 9.3.2008. She was wearing a nighty and she was carrying gold jewels in a bag and cash of Rs. 1,60,000/-. The vistim came near Fisheries college, Mangalore and she was waiting for the bus to go to Manjeshwara. At that time, two ...

S. Balaji S/O Subramanya, Occ Driver Vs. the State of Karnataka by Kri ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERK. Ramanna, J.Though this matter is listed for admission, with consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both parties; the matter is taken up for final disposal.2. The petitioner has come up with this revision petition under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMEC, Snrangapaina. dated 8/7/05 in C.C. No. 53/04, which haa been affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandya, in Crl. A. No. 81/2005 dated 13/10/1006. Hence, this revision.3. The case of the respondent/prosecution is that on 16/10/2003 at about 11.30 a.m. the revision petitioner being the driver of the goods tempo bearing Regn. No. TN-23-T-3438 on Mysore K.R.S. Road near Belagola MNPM Circle drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Hero Honda motor bike belonging to P.W. 1/Nagaraj bearing Regn. No. KA. 09. W. 8719 who was travelling in the said vehicle along with his wife Savithri/P.W.2 and also dashed ag...