Karnataka Court June 2009 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.
Management of International Travel Service by Its Proprietor Vs. Sri A ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR3441; 2009(6)KarLJ703; 2009(5)AIRKarR370
ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. Petition is by the management assailing the order passed on the application filed under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, by the Labour Court, Bangalore in Appln. No. 12/1995 on 14.2.2006.2. The applicant worked under the petitioner management since February 1980 as an Office Boy till he resigned during April 1995 expressing his grievance that due to the ill-treatment, he resigned. Thereafter, he tiled an application under Section 33(c)(2) of the Act to settle his benefits. Labour Court by order dated 8.5.2003, dismissed the application against which, writ petition was filed before this Court. This Court, having observed that the Labour Court failed to apply its mind to the evidence already on record and giving liberty to the parties to adduce evidence, remanded the matter back to the Labour court. On such remand, the award dated 14.2.2006 came to be passed by the Labour Court. Hence, this petition by the management raising several grounds.3...
H.G. Vijaya Raghava Reddy Vs. the Secretary, Karnataka State Transport ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ682
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. On the allegations of fraud and misrepresentation by the 2nd respondent, who obtained a transfer of the petitioner's permit No. 7/68, by order dated 17-6-1999 and the subsequent transfer of the permit to the 3rd respondent by order dated 31-1-2001, when questioned by the petitioner invoking the revision jurisdiction of the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal (KSTAT), were numbered as R.P. Nos. 107 and 108 of 2001. In addition, the petitioner filed a complaint petition before the jurisdictional Additional Civil Metropolitan Magistrate Court, whence, after an enquiry the investigating authority filed a B-report leading to dismissal of the complaint under Section 203 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, by order dated 12-3-2004. The petitioner additionally is said to have instituted a suit for declaration said to be pending before the City Civil Court.2. In the backdrop of these facts, the KSTAT recorded a finding that there was no material to establis...
Arihant Pharma Represented by Its Partner Mr. P. Madan Mohan Vs. the R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR3190; 2009(6)KarLJ599
ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. Heard the Counsel for the parties.2. The facts of the case, as urged in the petition, are as follows:The Petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in wholesale business of pharmaceutical and medical supplies. In the course of its business it had secured a cash credit loan of Rs. 1.25 crore, from M/s. Canara Bank on the security of its Stock-in-trade and immovable property at No. 47, Chikbazar Road, Shivajinagar, Bangalore. This premises was being used by the petitioner both for the partners residence and business of the firm.The petitioner had defaulted in servicing the loan and the bank had issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securing Interest Act 2002 (Hereinafter, referred to as the 'Securitization Act', for brevity). By virtue of this notice the business came to a stand still and the debt grew burger. The Bank took possession of both movables and the immovable property of the p...
Official Liquidator of Keonics Penta Semi-conductors Limited (In Liqn. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR3783
ORDERB.V. Nagarathna, J.1. This application is filed by the official liquidator under Section 454(2) of the Companies Act seeking a direction to the respondent to file statement of affairs under Section 454 of the Act.2. According to the applicant M/s. Keonics Penta Semiconductors Ltd., was ordered to be wound up by this Court by order dated 4.9.2002 in Company Petition No/22/1998 and the official liquidator attached to this Court was appointed as the liquidator of the said company. Initially an application under Section 454 of the Act was filed against certain Ex-Directors of the company in liquidation including the respondent herein in C.A. No. 1182/2002 and another application in C.A. No. 44/2005 against one Vittal S. Candade seeking According to the applicant, Sri. Rao H.V. one of the Ex-Directors died on 22.11.2000, Sri. Savoor Kao Krishna is represented by a counsel and that by order dated 21.2.2007 proceedings against the respondent herein were dropped and by order dated 17.8.20...
Gurukripa Beedi Industry Pvt. Ltd. by Its Director, Mr. R Damodhar Bha ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(6)AIRKarR138
ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. Petitioner has sought for quashing the order passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner on 30.5.2000 - annexure A as also the order dated 6.9.2005 - annexure D passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal and the order of the Recovery Order dated 14.10.2005 - annexure E passed by the 2nd respondent.2. Petitioner is a Beedi manufacturing industry having two units at Ullal and Uchilla falling within the jurisdiction of Employees Provident Fund Regional/Sub-Regional Office in Mangalore. There was said to be a wage revision of staff of both head office and its two units on 10.9.1996 as per the settlement between management and the Union under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act Besides including basic pay, DA, HRA, local allowance and bata applicable to all staff, special allowances adhoc/exgratia was given to certain employees who were on the rolls as on the date of settlement i.e., 10.9.1996 as per the settlement between the ma...
Chartered Housing Private Limited a Company Incorporated Under the Com ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(6)AIRKarR73
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. After hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties on 15.4.2009, this Court recorded thus:The 2nd petitioner claiming to be the sole and absolute owner of certain immovable properties at Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, offered the same to the 1st petitioner for development and entered into a joint development agreement dated 19-05-2006. The 1st respondent - Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (for short 'BBMP'), issued a circular dated 7-11-2007 Annexure-'C' permitting the officers to demand and recover betterment charges in respect of properties identical to that of the petitioner's property, at the rate of Rs. 600/- per sq.mt. and on demand being made on 18-07-2008, the pre-condition for transfer of katha into the name of the 1st petitioner Annexure-'D', the petitioners deposited Rs. 39,44,900/- by Demand Draft dated 22-07-2008 which when acknowledged, receipt Anncxure-'E' was issued. It is stated that consequent thereto, the BBMP issued the Katha C...
H.S. Mahesha S/O K. Shivanna, Advocate Vs. the State of Karnataka Rept ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-22-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR2442
ORDERS. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. In this case, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order at Annexure C dated 21.10.2008 whereby the third respondent was appointed as the District Commandant of Home Guards ('District Commandant' for short) of Tumkur District with immediate effect.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:One B. Shivakumar was appointed as the District Commandant of Home Guards by an order dated 22.3.2007 till 17.5.2008. The petitioner herein was appointed as the District Commandant by an order dated 21.7.2007 (Aimexure 'A') B. Shivakumar challenged the said order appointing the petitioner as the District Commandant of Home Guards of Tumkur District in W.P. No. 11706/2007. This Court granted an interim stay of the said order. The third respondent herein was appointed as the District Commandant by an order at Annexure 'C' dated 21.10.2008 with immediate effect. W.P. No. 11706/2007 filed by B. Shivakumar was disposed of as having become infructuous by an order ...
Shanthiniketan Housing Foundation (A) Registered Partnership Firm) Rep ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-19-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR2589; 2009(6)KarLJ205
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. In all these Writ Petitions the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of Section 27(2) and (3) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter far short referred to as the Act') as well as the procedure followed by the District and State Consumer Forum in issuing arrest warrants against them. Therefore, all these Writ Petitions axe taken up for consideration together and disposed of by this common order. However, for proper appreciation of the rival contentions, the facts pleaded in W.P. No. 700/2008 and the statement of objections filed in W.P. No. 18465/ 2006 by the Union of India which was adopted by them as the statement of objections in all the Writ Petitions, is set out as under.2. The petitioner is a registered partnership firm. It is in the business of land development and construction. The petitioner entered into an agreement with the land owners for development of land bearing Sy. No. 4848 and 2878 at 6th Main, V.V. Puram, Devaraja Moha...
K.M. Hiriyannappa S/O Manjappa Vs. State of Karnataka Dept. of Revenue ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-19-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR2844; 2010(1)KarLJ364
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition is seeking writ of certiorari for quashing Annexure-A the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga District, affirming the order passed by the third respondent rejecting the request of the petitioner for sinking borewell in his land.2. Petitioner is the owner in possession of the properties bearing Sy. No. 16/lPl measuring 33 guntas and Sy. No. 16/2A measuring 25 guntas situated at Nadamanchale Village, Sagar Taluk. There is an open well in Sy. No. 16/1P1 and it is the only water source for cultivation of his land. He has grown areca nut gardens which requires more water during summer season. The open well has no sufficient water. Therefore, he decided to dig borewell for the purpose of irrigating his areca nut garden. His case is that the Government Tank is situated at Sy. No. 13 and a water source is situated in Sy. No. 18, 2,500 ft. away from the petitioner's land. The petitioner's lands are situated on the upper porti...
Kamalabai Vs. State of Karnataka by Its Secretary, Rdpr and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-19-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR3456
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. In this writ petition petitioners are challenging the Notification dated 15.05.2009 issued by the first respondent-State Government in so far as it relates to reservation of the post of President of Bijapur Taluka Panchayat in favour of Scheduled Tribe category. Challenge is also made to the Notifications dated 20.05.2009 issued by the Assistant Commissioner and the Election Officer for the Taluka Panchayat Bijapur vide Annexures-'E' and 'F' publishing the calendar of events for election to be held for the post of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Bijapur and Basavana Bagewadi Taluka Panchayats respectively.2. The main contention of the petitioners is that there is violation of Rule 5(A) of the Karnataka Panchayatraj (Taluka Panchayat President and Vice President Reservation) Rules 2005 in as much as due to the percentage of Scheduled Tribe population in different talukas of the district, it is the Taluka Panchayat Basavana Bagewadi which will get its turn for reservat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »