Karnataka Court June 2009 Judgments

Smt. K.K. Banu D/O Late Kunhi Raman Vs. Smt. R. Bhagirathy W/O Late Ra ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR3429; 2010(1)KarLJ449; 2009(5)AIRKarR195

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner and 26 others including the 1st respondent herein contested from the Closebern constituency reserved for Scheduled Caste, of the Kadagadalu Gram Panchayath in the election held on 27.2.2005 whence the petitioner was declared elected having secured the highest number of votes while the 1st respondent secured the second highest number. The 1st respondent while calling in question the said declaration sought to be declared as the duly elected candidate, by filing Election Petition No. 1/2005 before the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) Madikeri, invoking the provisions of the Karnataka Panchayath Raj Act, 1993, for short the Act. The specific case of the election petitioner was that the declared candidate did not belong to Scheduled Caste and had, by furnishing a false caste certificate contested the election, though did belong to Bharathiya Hindu Malayali' caste, not a declared scheduled caste. That petition was opposed by the declared candidate arraigne...

Dr. Shivanand S/O Nanjunadappa, Former Director, Indira Gandhi Institu ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010(1)KarLJ246

N. Kumar, J.1. The appellant has challenged in this writ appeal the order passed by the learned Single Judge upholding the appointment of the 3rd respondent as Director of Indira Gandhi Institute of Child Health, Bangalore.2. The Indira Gandhi Institute of Child Health, Bangalore, the 4th respondent in this appeal, is a society registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Institute'). It is established to promote, establish, maintain and develop an institute for child health with a view to provide relief and treatment and advanced care to children and to encourage and promote research and training in child health and for such other purposes. It is an autonomous institute and its registered office is at South Hospital Complex, Dharmaram College Post, Near NIMHANS, Bangalore 29. The administration of the institute is vested with the Governing Council consisting 12 members. The minister for Health and Family Welfare, Go...

Mass Traders (P) Ltd. Vs. Appropriate Authority and ors.

Court: Karnataka

V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. During the pendency of this Appeal Misc.Writ No. 4823 of 2009 has been filed requesting this Court to permit the proposed 7th and 8th respondent to come on record as the property in question is a joint family property and their rights are involved. In support of the right claimed, learned Counsel for the proposed applicants placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in R.S.A. No. 580 of 1987 disposed of on 20-7-2002.2. The claim of the 7th respondent is seriously contested by the department. Learned Counsel for the appellant requested to reject the application. The learned Counsel for the appellant also submits that the property was sold in the year 1993 and the same has been vested with the Central Government by virtue of the provisions of Section 269UD of the Act.3. Sri M.V. Sheshachala, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the department, submits that a sum of Rs. 1,82,00,000 crores has already been paid in favour of the executant of the agreement. He th...

Polyfex (India) (P) Ltd. Vs. Director General of Income Tax (investiga ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner assessee is questioning the levy of interest under Sections 234B and 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act). The assessment year is 1989-90. Pursuant to the same, the assessing officer has refused to waive the interest.2. There was a regular assessment for the assessment year 1989-90, pursuant to the order dated 31-3-1990 by invoking the provisions of Section 115 {sic) of the Act. Suffice it to say that the proceedings were initiated again under Section 154 of the Act proposing to rectify the assessment for the reasons stated therein. On receipt of the order the assessee filed an application on 1st April, 1991 before the second respondent seeking cancellation of the rectification made by him for the reasons stated therein. It is stated that the rectification application has not been disposed of till date in spite of reminders. In the meantime, the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) deleted both the acc...

R.K. Prathapa Vs. the Tahsildar and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KarLJ731

ORDERV. Jagannathan, J.1. Both these revision petitions arise out of the common order passed by the Trial Court on a preliminary issue framed for consideration touching upon the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to deal with any property which is declared to be Wakf property. The Trial Court dismissed the suits of the respective plaintiffs, who are the petitioners herein, for injunction by holding that the suits of the plaintiffs are not maintainable since the suit properties are part and parcel of the S. No. 161 i.e., Wakf property. With the said observation, the suits of the plaintiffs were dismissed.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order of the Trial Court.3. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the property in respect of which the plaintiffs have sought the relief of injunction is not Wakf property and it is the property outside the purview of the Wakf Board.4. The learned Counsel for respondent 2 submitted that...

The National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Kumari Martina and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR2776

A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.1. 1st Respondent/Petitioner, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') in the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore (for short 'Tribunal') against the 2nd Respondent/Insured and the Appellant/Insurer, claiming compensation for the loss caused, on account of the injuries sustained by her, due to the actionable wrong on the part of the insured, in driving his motor vehicle - Car bearing No. KA-02-P/0993 on 20.8.2003. The owner/Insured, did not appear and was placed ex-parte by the Tribunal. The Appellant/Insurer, contested the claim petition. In its statement of objections to the claim petition, the insurer stated that, it had issued a policy in favour of the 2nd Respondent, insuring the said vehicle for the period 22.3.2003 to 21.3.2004. However, the cheque issued by the insured towards the premium in respect of the policy was returned dishonoured and therefore the policy was can...

Muthoot Finance Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by Its Regional Manager, Mr. C. Rajan P ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner has sought for a direction to declare that the respondents herein haw no authority to insist upon the petitioner to obtain a license under the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 to carry on its business. The petitioner has further sought for a declaration that it is beyond the competence of the Sub-Registrar to impose restrictions on the petitioner to carry on its business by invoking the provisions of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961, since the petitioner herein is a private limited company registered under the Companies Act and governed by the Reserve Bank of India guidelines. The petitioner has also further sought for a direction to the respondents not to take action against the petitioner till consideration of the application dated 31.03.2008 submitted by the petitioner for exemption of the petitioner from the purview of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961. In view of not taking any decision on its representation within a reasonable time a...

Divisional Controller, the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari quashing the award dated 7-3-2008 passed m Reference No. 45/2004 by the Principal Labour Court. Hubli.2. The petitioner - Corporation contended that the respondent was working as a conductor in the establishment of petitioner - Corporation since March, 1976. He remained unauthorised absent from 1.1.1994 to 2.6.1994 without intimating the Management. He was issued with a notice directing him to join for duties within three days from the date of receipt of the notice and inspite of receiving the same he remained unauthorised absent. The unauthorised absence was reported. On the basis of the report, the disciplinary authority issued article of charges to the respondent and he submitted his reply to the same. The disciplinary authority after perusal of the relevant materials on record and assessing the evidence held that the respondent was guilty of charges and dismissed the respondent from service.3...

The Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Rep. by Its Ad ...

Court: Karnataka

K. Bhakthavatsala, J.1. The appellant/Insurance Company in MVC No. 5273/2004 on the file of Court of Small Causes/Additional M.A.C.T at Bangalore city, is before this Court under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, praying for setting aside the impugned Judgment and Award dated 03.09.2005.2. Heard arguments.3. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the appeal may be stated as under.Respondent No. 1/claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation of Rs. 2,85,000/- towards personal injuries sustained by him in the motor accident that occurred on 11.01.2004 at about 9.00 p.m., when he was riding the motor cycle bearing No. KA-06/O-1088 on the Ring Road near Fly Over at Hebbal. He filed the claim petition against insurer and owner of the car bearing Registration No. KA-04/MA-4709.It is the case of the claimant that Car bearing Registration No. KA-04/MA-4709 came from behind and over-took the motor-cycle and s...

Dr. B.B. Tambakad, Additional Director (Retired), Health and Family We ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. Heard rite Counsel for the petitioner and the respondent.2. The facts briefly stated are as follows:The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 31.7.2002 which is an order by the State Government referring a matter for investigation by the Loksyukta and the final investigation report submitted by the Lokayukta. It transpires that there were allegations of omission and commission by the petitioner during his tenure as the Additional Director, Health and Family Welfare Department and it is on the basis of such allegation that the State Government had referred the matter to the Lokayukta for investigation under Section 7(2A) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity). The Lokayukta in turn having initially investigated the affairs of the department in which the petitioner was acting as the Additional Director through its Technical Wing had thereafter, submitted an Investigation Report and a Final Investigation Repo...