Karnataka Court April 2009 Judgments

Shri Basavalingachari Vs. the Chief Traffic Manager, Bangalore Metropo ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. The petitioner has sought fox quashing the Award passed by the Labour Court in ID. No. 33/2003 dated 21-11-2007.2, Although the petitioner was appointed as Conductor he became a member of the second petitioner Federation representing the Depot has Union leader. It is alleged that he had used abusive language against the Depot Manager. After serving the articles of charges, he replied to the same, but the ease wee rejected. On the basis of the Enquiry report, he wee dismissed front service during 2003. The workman raised a dispute under Section 10(4)(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court after enquiry having found that the enquiry held is fair and proper, confirmed the order of dismissal holding that the I party workman used abusive language against the Depot Manager, Security Guards and ether persons. Hence, this petition by the workman.3. Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties.4. According to the submission of the learned...

Vijaya Kumar Shetty S/O. B. Bhoja Shetty, Vs. the State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Arali Nagaraj, J.1. The appellant Nos. 1 to 4 herein who were respectively accused Nos. 1 to 4 in Special Case No. 21/03 on the tile of the learned Special Judge, Udupi (hereinafter referred to the 'Trial Court' for short) have challenged the legality and correctness of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 9.5.2006 passed in the said case convicting all these accused-appellant Nos. 1 to 4 for the offences under Sections 448, 323, 326 and 506(2) r/w Section 34 of IPC.2. Stated in brief the case of the prosecution as alleged in the complaint (Ex.P1) dated 20.10.2003 filed by the complainant Govinda Naika S/o. Annaiava Naika of Kalkunjebailu, Santhekatte, Kalathur Village of Udupi Taluk is as under:a) The complainant has been residing at the said address along with his wife Smt. Suma (PW3) and his son Raghavendra (PW4). His daughter Smt. Baby (PW2) has been residing near the residence of the complainant along with her husband Karunakar and her children. The said Karunak...

Sri V. Rajkumar Vs. Sri C.M. Abu Mohammed (Since Deceased by His L.Rs. ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. Sri M.D. Raghunath, learned Counsel files vakalath for the respondents.2. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court on 22.04.2009, the Deputy Registrar, City Civil Court, Mayo Hall Unit, is present before the Court and submitted that the certified copies of the documents in HRC No. 200/1975 applied tor by the petitioner could not be issued as the records have been destroyed on 30.07.1988. He further submitted that the documents in O.S. No. 16707/2002 as sought by the petitioner have been dispatched by R.P.A.D. to his address and have been also forwarded to the Court with a request to supply them to the petitioner. Insofar as documents in Execution No. 353/1977 are concerned, it is stated before the Court that despite efforts made the said documents have not been traced and the search is on and if the file is traced, the documents sought for will be issued or else necessary endorsement in this regard will be issued to the petitioner.3. Having due regard to thi...

Dr. J. Sirish Choudhary S/O Sri Venkata Rayalu Vs. the Union of India ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. This writ petition is filed by the applicant in O.A. No. 77/2009 being aggrieved by the order dated 15.4.2009, wherein the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') has allowed MA No.89/2009 and vacated the order for maintenance of status quo dated 20.2.2009 in respect of the present posting of the applicant and has directed the respondents to go ahead with the postings.2. The petitioner herein filed OA No. 77/2009 on the file of the Tribunal challenging the order of transfer passed by the respondent dated 22.7.2008, wherein the applicant/petitioner has been transferred from the Joint Controller of Defence Accounts, Office of the Controller of Defence Accounts at Bangalore to the Accounts Office, Ordnance Factory, Chanda. The Tribunal passed an interim order dated 20.2.2009 to maintain status-quo till the next date of hearing and the said order of status-quo was extended from time to time on different dates when the case...

H.R. Gaviappa and Co. (a Registered Partnership Firm) Vs. State of Kar ...

Court: Karnataka

P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. Whether the report of the Lokayukta could be the basis for registering the First Information Report vide FOC No. 162/2008-09 dated 11.3.2009 against the petitioner and to pass an order dated 11.3.2009 seizing the iron ore alleged to have illegally mined in the forest area as well as the tools, vehicles and machinery used for such illegal mining; and whether such FIR and the order of seizure can be quashed by exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, are the questions that arise for our consideration in the present writ petition.2. The petitioner was originally granted a mining lease on 2.4.2005 bearing M.L. No. 2483 for extracting iron ore for a period of fourteen years over an extent of 34 hectares in Navalati/Vittalnaga'r villages, Sandur taluk, Bellary District, with effect from 24.4.2002. Pursuant to the said mining lease, an agreement of lease was entered into between the petitioner and the Government of Karnatak...

Sri T.B. Ninge Gowda Principal and Professor Dayananda Sagar Collage o ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, a Professor in Economics and a Principal of Dayananda Saga; College of Science, Arts & Commence, Bangalore, when issued with a communication dated 17-02-2009 Annexure-A by the 1st respondent to furnish the list of officers to prepare a data base of officials to be drafted for duty in the ensuing Parliamentary elections, claims to have prepared a list, which, by letter dated 16.3.2009, Annexure-B, was handed over to the Joint Director of Collegiate education, on instructions, who in turn was to transmit the same to the 1st respondent. It is the allegation of the petitioner that on 30-03-2009 at about 10.30 a.m., was sewed with the communication dated 20-03-2009 Annexure-'C' of the 1st respondent. On the very same day, the petitioner claims to have handed over his letter, Annexure-'D'. It is the further allegation of the petitioner that on the very same day, the petitioner received a notice dated 20-08-2009 Annexure-'E' by registered post acknow...

Sri M.M. Chandy S/O Late M.C. Mathew, Vs. Smt. Damayanthi Bai and ors.

Court: Karnataka

ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. On 22.04.2009, this Court has passed the following order on the compromise petition filed by the parties:Sri Yeshu Mishra, learned Counsel files vakalath for respondent No. 1 (Plaintiff No. 1).Sri G. Vikram, learned Counsel files vakalath for Respondents 2, 3 and 4 (Defendants 2, 3 and 4).M/s King & Patridge, learned Counsel files vakalathfor Respondent No.5 (Defendant No. 5)Though this writ petition arises out of an order passed on an interlocutory application granting amendment of the plaint, the parties in the proceedings have filed a compromise petition stating that the entire dispute between them has been settled in terms stated in the compromise petition and therefore the suit itself may be disposed of in terms of the compromise agreed between the parties.All the parties are present before the Court. Insofar as Defendant No. 7 Mrs. Beena Philip who is petitioner No. 3 herein is concerned she is represented by defendant No. 8 Mrs. Swapna Mammen - Petitioner N...

Smt. Kempamma W/O Jayaramareddy and ors. Vs. Smt. Meenakshi W/O Naraya ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has today produced before the court, the order sheet of the court below maintained in Exe, No. 5/2009. It is seen from the order dated 20.4 2009 that the court below has directed the decree holder to hand over the properly seized to the court. It is also further seen, since the decree holder requested the court below to provide police protection to him to transport the raised articles to the court, the court below has observed that the police help shall be given to the decree holder.2. In the light of this order passed on 20.4.2009, the grievance of the petitioners that the custody of adzed articles have been illegally given to the decree holder, does not survive for consideration. However, if the articles are not transported to the court and if the petitioners are of the view that the decree holder will tamper the articles without complying with the direction issued by the court, then it is open to the decree holder to move the...

Shivashakthi Manila Sangha (Regd.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi), the Minis ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. This public interest litigation is filed seeking for an order to restrain the respondents from changing the name of 'Bangalore/Bengaluru international Airport' to name it alter names of any personalities and to direct the respondents to strictly abide by the decision already reached as to the name of the airport as per order dated 29.8.2005. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner is a registered society under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. The petitioner has no personal interest or gain in the writ petition. The Bangalore International Airport Limited was started in the name of 'Bangalore International Airport' by adopting the city's name and the name as 'Bengaluru in lieu of Bangalore' is yet to be approved by the 1st respondent - Union of India and the Airport has commenced operation. However, the representations an being made for changing the name of the Airport and to name the Airport after names of prominent personalities like founder of Bangalo...

A. Ravishankar Shetty Son of A. Balakrishna Shetty and anr. Vs. P.S. S ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KCCR2922(DB)

(RFA filed u/s 96 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 06.09.2007 passed in OS.No.8298/2001 on the file of the XV Addl. City Civil and sessions Judge, Bangalore City, CCH.No.3, decreeing the suit for ejectment.)K.N. Keshavanarayana, J.1. This appeal filed under Section 96 of CPC is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 6.9.2007 passed by the XV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore in O.S.No.8298/2001 decreeing the said suit filed by the respondents No.1 and 2 herein and directing the appellants No.1 and 2 to vacate and deliver the vacant possession of the suit schedule premises to the plaintiffs and also directing the defendants to jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- towards the arrears of rent and to pay the damages at the rate of Rs.25,000/- p.m. from the date of the suit till delivery of the vacant possession of schedule premises, to the plaintiffs.2. The respondents No.1 and 2 herein are the plaintiffs No.1 and 2, while appellants No.1 ...