Karnataka Court July 2009 Judgments

Gulbarga Central Co-operative Wholesale Store Vs. the Returning Office ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ595

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. Elections to the 12 out of 14 posts of Directors in the 2nd respondent-Karnataka State Co-operative Consumer Federation Limited, a body, registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short, 'the Act'), were held on 20-7-2009 pursuant to the calendar of events notified on 24-6-2009 Annexure-A. Two other nominated Directors of the 2nd respondent are said to be the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies and the Managing Director of the Federation.2. According to the petitioner, respondents 4 and 5 filed two Dispute Nos. 5 and 6/2009-10 before the 3rd respondent-Additional Registrar of Co-operative Societies calling in question the order of the 1st respondent holding that they were ineligible to participate in the elections to the post of Directors in the 2nd respondent-Federation, and in which the 3rd respondent, by interim orders dated 10-7-2009 Annexures-C and C1, permitted them to the included in the electoral list, followed by a corri...

Siddappa Doddasadeppa Gundyagol and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(6)KarLJ95

ORDERJawad Rahim, J.1. The petitioners are ranked as accused 1 to 3 in Crime No. 14 of 2009 facing charge for offences punishable under Sections 363, 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which case after investigation has resulted in filing of the charge-sheet for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 364, 302, 201 and 149 of the IPC.2. The petitioners are in judicial custody and seek grant of bail.3. Heard both sides; Perused records. It shows that on the complaint of one Gudadappa Yellappa Gadakari, the investigation was taken up, in which he alleged that his son Yallappa was an actor and was regularly visiting Yallapur for drama rehearsal. On 13-12-2008 at about 5 p.m. he had gone to Yallapur for drama rehearsal but did not return even after 11.00 p.m. As the search failed, the complainant, therefore, lodged report regarding missing of Yallapur at Yamakanmaradi Police Station and thereafter the search continued.4. On 6-1-2009, he learnt that a...

Nanjundegowda S/O Nanjegowda Vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corpor ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR3927

ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. Petitioner has sought for quashing the order of the Disciplinary Authority at annexure B dated 27.2.2003 and the order passed by the Appellate Authority at annexure C dated 3.10/11/2004 and also to quash the endorsement dated 16.12.2003 at annexure E and to give him promotion from the date the petitioner's junior S Manohar was promoted and for consequential benefits.2. Heard the counsel for the respective parties.3. According to the petitioner's counsel, alleging dereliction of duty, various charges were levelled against the workman. While rejecting his reply, without holding an inquiry, impugned order of withholding two increments with cumulative effect came to be passed by the Disciplinary Authority against which, appeal was preferred. The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal. It is his contention that there is non-application of mind and the order passed by the disciplinary authority as well as by the appellate authority do not sustain on the ground...

Sri. S.R. Venkatareddy Son of Late Ramaiah Reddy Rep. by Gpa Holder Sr ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR4331

B. Sreenivase Gowda, J.1. This appeal is listed for orders for acceptance of counsel's submission on office objections regarding maintainability of the appeal.2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant.3. I have perused the impugned order and found that the trial court by order dated 22-8.08 posted the case to hear on the following point:Whether several causes of action against several defendants joined in accordance with law?and after hearing the parties on the said point, it has passed the impugned order holding that the composite suit against defendant Nos. 1 to 9 is clearly barred under Order 2 Rule 3 CPC and joinder of several cause of action against several defendants in this composite suit will embarrass and it will definitely delay the trial. Further, it will cause inconvenience to the Court. Therefore, it is necessary to direct the plaintiff to file separate suits against each of the defendants. Hence, the trial court, by exercising the power under Order 2...

Y.K. Kumaraswamy S/O Late Krishna Jois Vs. Secretary to Government Dep ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR4187

K.L. Manjunath, J.The legality and correctness of the order passed In W.P. No. 2953/2005 dated 25-02-2005 is the subject matter of this appeal.2. The appellant was an employee of Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Limited. He was dismissed from the service. Contending that dismissal of him from the service Is Illegal, he approached the Labour Officer and Conciliation Officer, Chamarajanagar. Annexure-A is the application submitted by the appellant before the Conciliation Officer. On 30-11-2004, as per Annexure-B, he directed the appellant to approach the Labour Court and get the claim settled under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short 'the Act').3. This order was questioned by the appellant by filing a writ petition on the ground that the Conciliation Officer has failed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The learned Single Judge considering that the dispute is only with regard to payment of arrears of salary and wages has ...

Smt. Geetha W/O Late B.N. Chikegowda, Vs. the Managing Director, Ksrtc

Court: Karnataka

N.K. Patil, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and award dated 5th July 2004 passed in M.V.C. No. 634/2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-2) ('Claims Tribunal' for brevity), on the ground that, the amount awarded by Claims Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement.2. The facts in nutshell are, one Sri. B.N. Chikkegowda, who was a Traffic Controller in the respondent Corporation is the deceased in this case. The appellants 1 and 4 are the wife and mother of the deceased and appellants 2 and 3 are the sons of the deceased. That on 10th October 2001, at about 6:30 A.M., when the deceased was travelling in an Ambassador car bearing No. CKP-1155 on Bangalore-Mangalore National Highway near Abbar Factory, the driver of the car drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against a road side tree, as a result of which, the deceased sustained severe head injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to NIMHANS, and subsequently to D.G. Ho...

Manjunatha S/O Venkata Shetty Vs. State of Karnataka by K.R. Pet Polic ...

Court: Karnataka

Arali Nagaraj, J.1. This appeal is by accused No. 1 in Sessions Case No. 68/2003 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court II, Mandya (hereinafter referred to as the Trial Court for short). This appellant was one of the four accused in the said case. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.06.2006 passed by the Trial Court in the said case convicting this appellant (accused No. 1) for the offences under Sections 498A & 304-B of I.P.C. and also under Sections 3, 4 & 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'DP Act' for short) is challenged by him in this appeal.2. Accused No. 2 namely, Venkatashetty, the father of accused No. 1, died during the pendency of the trial and therefore, the case against him came to be abated. Accused Nos.3 & 4 in the said case came to be acquitted of all the said offences, though they were tried for the same offences along with this appellant accused. Sri A.V. Ramakrishna, learned High Court Gov...

Sri. P. Venkateshwara Rao, S/O. P. Suranna, Class-i Contractor Vs. Sri ...

Court: Karnataka

P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. The writ appeal and writ petitions are related to grant of mining lease of an extent of 15.38 Hectares of Navalatti Village, Sandur Taluk, Bellary District and therefore, the above writ appeal and writ petitions are heard and disposed of together.2.1. Writ appeal No. 1243/2008 is directed against the order dated 14th March 2008 made in Writ Petition No. 10463/2006 filed by one Iqbal Baig challenging the proceedings dated 1.9.2005 by the State of Karnataka recommending to grant mining lease in respect of Manganese and Iron Ore over an extent of 15.38 Hectares of Navalatti Village, Sandur Taluk, Bellary District in favour of P. Venkateshwara Rao for a period of 20 years, to the Central Government under Section 5(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short hereinafter referred to as MMMDR Act'), made pursuant to the notification dated 15.3.2003 under Rule 59(1) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (for short hereinafter referred to ...

Smt. Kusuma I.M. W/O Late I.M. Muchatti, Vs. Sri Adon, Adon, Nirmal Ku ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009(3)Kar3157

S. Abdul Nazeer, J.This appeal is directed against the judgment and award in MVC No. 91/1998 dated 29.5.2002 on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and MACT-III (for short 'Tribunal'), Davanagere. The appellants are the claimants, the first respondent is the owner and the second respondent is the insurer of the offending vehicle. The claimants have sought award of 25 lakhs towards compensation on account of the death of I.M. Muchatti in the accident in question. However, the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 7,28,304/- with interest at 8% per annum. The appeal has been filed seeking enhancement of compensation.2. It is the case of the claimants that on 1.6.1996 at about 11.00 a.m. the deceased was travelling from Davanagere to Anagodu in a scooter bearing No. KA-17/H-3051. When he came near Vaddanahalli cross on NH. 4, the car bearing No. MH-12/W-782 suddenly dashed against the scooter driven by the deceased. It is further contended that the cause for accid...

Smt. Karisiddamma W/O Kottambari Shivarayappa (Senior Citizen Benefit ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERAshok B. Hinchigeri, J.1. The petitioners have raised the challenge to the order, dated 12/12/2008 passed by the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) at Honnali on IA No. IV in O.S. No. 182/2007 (Annexure-B).2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondent filed the suit against the respondents seeking the relief of permanent injunction. In the said suit proceedings, she also made IA No. I for the grant of temporary injunction. The Trial Court, by its order, dated 15/4/2008 granted the temporary injunction after hearing both the sides. The respondent filed I.A. No. IV ventilating her grievance before the Trial Court that the petitioners are unnecessarily obstructing her in the use of the road. It was the further grievance of the respondent that she approached the police seeking their protection but in vain. She therefore had to file the said I.A. seeking a direction to the Police Sub-Inspector (P.S.I, for short), Honnali to give police protection to the respondent for enjoyi...