Karnataka Court October 2010 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.
Sri G Govindaswamy S/O. Doreswamy Vs. the Managing Director of a P S R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enachment of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim before the Tribunal.3. The On 4.6.2006, when the claimant was travelling in APSRTC bus bearing registration NoAP-lQ-Z-8140 near Varigapalli Village, Yadamuri Mandal, Chittor, the driver of the said bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and caused accident. As a result, the claimant sustained injuries. Hence, he filed claim petition before the MACT. Bangalore seeking compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/-. The Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs. 1,61,200/- with interest at 6% p.a. is no occurrence of accident, negligence and liability of the APSRTC, the only point that arises for my consideration in the appeal is:"whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?5. After hearing the learned counsel appearing: for the parties and perusing t...
Syed Habeeb S/O.Late Abdul Azeez Vs. T M Vijayakumar S/O.T M Siddaradh ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
1. Plaintiff in O.S.No.597/96 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn), Davanagere is the appellant in this appeal.2. Parties would be referred according to their ranking before the Trial Court for convenience.3. Suit is filed by the plaintiffs seeking declaration and permanent injunction in regard to agricultural land measuring 4 acres 5 guntas (western portion of Sy.No. 13/1 of Karur village, Davangere Kasaba Hobli). It is the case of the plaintiffs that the suit property originally belongs to one Smt. Mehaboob Bi. She died long back leaving behind her two sons namely Syed Kliasim Sab and Syed Zainulabddin Sab. After the death of Smt.Mehaboob Bi, both sons jointly enjoyed the property in common for some time and thereafter there was an oral partition between the brothers. In Sy.No. 13 Syed Khasim Sab took 8 acres 10 guntas and syed Zainulabddin Sab took 5 acres 27 guntas. After partition, both the brothers enjoyed their respective shares as absolute owners. In the year 1939,...
The Managing Director, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Vs. Shank ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
:1. This appeal by the appellant- Corporation is arising out of the impugned judgment and award dated 25/02/2005 passed in MVC No. 3330/2003 by the VI Additional SCJ and Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-2), (hereinafter referred to as ' Tribunal1 for short).2. The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of 3,15,000/- under different heads with interest at 7% per annum from the date of petition till its deposit, as against the claim of the claimants for a sum of 8,00.000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Lalbabu Sahani, in the road traffic accident.3. In brief, the facts of the case are:The claimant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents and claimant Nos. 3, 4 and 5 are the brother and sisters of the deceased Sri. Lalbabu Sahani and they have filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under section 163-A of M.V. Act. claiming compensation against the Corporation, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident that occurred on 14....
Somashekharaiah S/O Late Kariyaiah Vs. the State by Excise Police Hass ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused in Crime No.3/2010 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8 (b) (c), 20 (a) (b) and Section 25 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and he has sought for anticipatory Bail.2. Heard the learned Counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader and i have been taken through investigation records.3. On credible information, the Investigation Officer and other persons proceeded to the house of the petitioner on 21.8.2010 at about 10.00 a.m., and they at found Ganja plant grown in the backyard of the petitioner The ganja plant was grown in the manure stored in the backyard and the ganja plant was seized. The entire plant was weighing about 5 Kg 900 gms.4. The learned Government Advocate has made available the documents to show that the backyard and manure where the ganja plant was grown belongs to the father of the petitioner. In the circumstances, it is not possible to attribute physical/constructive possession of the ganja plant to the peti...
Minhaj Sahar D/O Nasir Pasha Vs. M/S the Oriental Insurance Co Ltd
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Heard, the appeal is admitted and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.4. The brief facts of the case:On 31.07.2008, when the claimant along with her mother was crossing 7,h cross near Jumma Masjid, Cholarapalya, Vijayanagar on the left side of road, an auto rickshaw bearing registration No.KA-05-A-7015 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. As a result, the claimant fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, the father of the claimant filed a claim petition before the MACT, Bangalore seeking compensation of Rs. 10.00,000/- as the claimant is a minor. The Tribunal awarded her a compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.5. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of accident...
Sri Chengulanda Kishore S/O Sri Muthanna Vs.Sri V.T.Sudheer S/O Sri V. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
1. This is claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in MVC.No. 125/2005 on the file of MACT.Virajpet. The fact that claimant was pillion rider of motor cycle bearing No.KA-12/EE 7513, the said motor cycle was hit by an autoricksnaw bearing No.KA-12/6175 on 4.4.2005 at about 4.45 p.m., near Konangeri junction at lludikeri village near S.T.Colony is not in dispute. It is also not disputed that claimant has suffered compound fracture of both bones of right leg and also other injuries. The claimant filed a petition seeking compensation in a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- against the driver, owner and insurer of Auto rickshaw and also insurer of motor cycle on which he was travelling.2. In the court below, claimant examined himself as PW. 1 and examined Doctor Shantharam Shetty, who treated him while he was under treatment. The court below on appreciation of the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence available on record allowed the claim petition in part awarding compensation i...
RamannA. S/O Saneerappa and anr Vs. Javanappa, S/O Late Javalingappa, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
1. Plaintiffs in OS 322/1996 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC, Sira are the appellants in this second appeal.2. Pax-ties will be referred according to their status found in the suit for convenience.3. Suit is filed by the plaintiffs seeking for declaration of their share in the suit schedule properties for partition and separate possession of their 2/3rd share in suit schedule property.4. It is the case of plaintiffs that sale deed executed by brother of plaintiffs - Hanumantharayappa do not bind the plaintiffs share, in regard to suit schedule properties as all the three brothers succeeded to it. Suit schedule properties are the ancestral properties of plaintiffs. So, seek for partition.5. The defendants filed their written statement, denied the plaint averments. Learned Trial .Judge has framed issues permitted the parties to lead evidence. PW1 & PW2 are examined, Exs.Pl to P6 are marked. DW1 to DW3 are examined, Exs.Dl & D23 are marked. 6. Learned Trial Judge has dismis...
P.Manjunath S/O K.R.Puttappa and anr Vs. State by Cbi, Acb and Spe
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
1. Accused No. 1 U.Rajendra Bhatt (since deceased), accused No. 2 G.P.Bhaskar Kumar {since absconding, case separated), accused No. 3 P.Manjunath and accused No. 4 Syed Inayathulla (appellants 1 and 2 herein) were charge sheeted for an offence punishable under Section 120-B r/w. Section 420 of IPC and also for an offence under Section 5(l)(d) r/w 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Accused No.2 was absconding. Therefore, case against him was separated. Accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 were tried for the a forestated offences. Accused No. 1 was held guilty of an offence under Section 420 r/w Section 120-B and also of an offence under Section 5(l)(d) r/w 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Accused Nos.3 and 4 are held guilty of an offence under Section 420 r/w 120-B of IPC. The first accused had filed Criminal Appeal No. 1191/2004 and the instant appeal is filed by accused Nos.3 and 4 during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No.ll91/2004, the first accused died. This Court of orde...
Sri.G.Seetharamu. S/O Late G.K.S.iyengar Vs. Sri.K.G.Thyagaraju and an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
1. This appeal is by the complainant assailing the order of the XVIII Addl. CMM, & XX ASCJ. Bangalore, in C.C.No. 15015/2005 dated 05.04.2007.2. According to the complainant, accused Nos.1 and 2 being the husband and wife had borrowed a sum of Rs.6 lakhs from the complainant as hand loan for their domestic necessities and towards discharge of their liability, both of themissued a cheque dated 14.02.2005 drawn on Syndicate Bank, Malleswaram Branch, Bangalore, for Rs.6 lakhs, which when presented for encashment, was returned for insufficient funds.Accordingly, after causing legal notice, since the accused persons did not make payment, the complaint was filed. The trial Court, after enquiry, has dismissed the complaint. Hence,3. Heard4. So far as issuance of notice is concerned, the notice sent to the accused has been returned with a shara 'not claimed', hence, it has to be held, there is deemed service of notice this appeal.5. The trial Court having noted that the complainant and his Cou...
Sri. Chandrashekar. S/O. Dodda Shivanna Vs. Smt. N. P. KaverammA. W/O. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-26-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation.2. Heard The appeal is admitted and with the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties it is taken up for final disposal.3. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition.4. Brief facts of the case are:That on 19.08.2005 when the claimant was walking on he left side of NH 4 road, near Tavarekere, Hosakote Taluk, a Tata estate bearing registration No.KA-01-M-9901 came in a rash and negligent ear manner and dashed against him as a result he sustained grievous injuries. Hence he filed a claim petition before MACT, Bangalore seeking compensation of 10,00,000/- and the Tribunal has awarded compensation of .89,800/- with interest at 6% p.a.5. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of the accident, negligence and liability of the Insurer of the offending vehicle the only point that remains for consideration is:Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal...
- ‹ Prev
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- Next ›
- Last »