Karnataka Court November 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, Jayarama Reddy S/O Narayana Reddy and ors. Vs. Sri. Venkatesan Ma ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimants 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 16,09,2006, when the deceased Abhilash was riding his motorcycle along with pillion rider N.Murali on Hosur Road, Sarjapur junction, a private bus bearing registration No.KA-06-A-3t27 came at high speed m a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his motorcycle. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries and died on the way to hospital. His parents and younger sister filed a claim petition before the MACT, Bangalore seeking compensation of Rs.39,00,000/-, The Tribunal awarded them a compensation of Ps.6,18,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.5. As there is no dispute regarding death of the deceased in a ...
Thanigachalam S/O Thangavel Vs. Smt.P.Shanthi W/O Late P.Bala Raman an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. Petitioner has filed O.S.No.8110/96 in the City Civil Court, Bangalore, against the respondents to declare him as the absolute owner and to restrain the defendants 1 to 4 & 6 from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property. The defendants have filed written statement and have contested the claim of the petitioner. Issues have been framed on 10.12.2002 and the trial of the suit has commenced. The petitioner filed I.A No.16 under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC seeking permission of the court to amend the plaint i.e., to incorporate the proposed plea and a consequential prayer. The defendants have filed statement of objections. The trial court,, finding LA No. 16 to be devoid of merit, has passed an order of dismissal dated 30.08.2010. Aggrieved, the plaintiff has filed this writ petition.2. Sri A.M.Surya Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that, I.A No. 16 has not been considered by the trial court in the correct perspe...
M/S.Ahlcon Ready Mix Concrete (P) Ltd Vs. the Assistant Commissioner o ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. Sri K.M.Shivayogiswamy, the learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice for the respondent.2. The petitioner has ra-sed the challenge to the protective assessment order. Dated 22-9-2010 (Annexure-P) passed under Section 38(5) read with Section 52(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereafter ' KVAT Act' for short).3. Sri M.N.Shankaregowda, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is passed without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to show that it is not liable to pay any tax.4. Sri K.M.Shivayogiswamy, the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that the notice, dated 15-9-2010 was indeed issued to the petitioner.5. The notice (Annexure-M) is dated 15.9.2010. It is not in dispute that the said notice was received by the petitioner on 17.9.2010. The respondent has not even waited seven days for the petitioner to file its explanation. Worst of all, the notice, dated 15.9.2010 does not even...
K Kandavel S/O. Karuppana Gounder. Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Even though this appeal is listed for orders 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 before the Tribunal.4. Brief facts of the case are: That on 4-11-05, when the claimant was travelling as a pillion rider on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-05-Y-8979. a BMTC bus bearing registration No.KA.Ol.F. 1105 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against their motor cycle. As a result, the claimant fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition before the MACT, Bangalore, seeking compensation of 10.00,000/-. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award has awarded compensation of 4,84,300/-with interest at 6% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal the claimant is in appeal seeking ...
State of Karnataka Vs. Fyroz. S/O Ameer Jan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1) In this appeal by the State, the legality and correctness of the judgment and order dated 16.08.2005 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge. Kolar, in S.C. No.7/2003 acquitting the respondent/accused of all the charges leveled against him for the offences punishable under Seotions-3, 4 & 6 of the Down/ Prohibition Act (for short "D.P. Act) and Sections 495-A. 304-B and 306 of IPC, is questioned.2) Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is as under:-PW.2-Subhan Sab is the father. PW.3-Afsar Pasha. PW. 19-Anwar Pasha are the brothers. PW.4-Smt.Shchataj is the sister. PW-5-Alla Bakasi is the maternal uncle. PW.20-Chotesabi is the uncle and PW.22-Syed Afsar is the brother-in-law of the deceased-Haseena. The deceased was married to the respondent/accused on 27.07.2000. Few days prior to the marriage, talks were held and during the marriage talks, the accused demanded a watch, a gold ring from PW.2 and also asked PW.2 to bear expenses of the marriage. At the time of marriage. PW.2 gav...
Puttaraju, S/O. Krishnappa and NethrA. W/O. Puttaraju Vs. M/S. United ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation.2. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition.3. Brief tacts of the case are: That on 27.09.2006 when the deceased K.P. Sunil was riding his cycle and proceeding towards Bindigana Ville, Nagamangala Taluk, near C. Bangale gate on NH 48, Bangalore - Mangalore road, a Scorpio bearing registration No. KA-04-MC-1332 came from Bangalore side came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his cycle from backside; as a result he sustained grievous injuries and died on the way to hospital. His parents filed a claim petition before MACT, Bangalore seeking compensation of 10,00,000/- and the Tribunal has awarded compensation of 1.80,000/-with interest at 6% p.a.4. The deceased K.P. Sunil was aged about 11 years at the time of his death in the accident as evident from post mortem report; Ex P 3.5. The matter relating to awarding compensation in case of a death of a...
Omkaramma W/O Thimmanna and ors. Vs. S.V.Venkateshappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. One Sri S.V Vsnkateshappa filed O.S.132/09 on the file of Civil Judge (jr Dn.), Hosadurga, against the petitioners and respondents 2 to 10 seeking declaration and injunctive reliefs. Plaintiff passed away on 26.11.09. I.A.7 was filed by the 1 respondent on 24.2.2010, under O 22 R 3 CPC to permit him to prosecute the suit as legal representative of the plaintiff. The petitioners filed statement of objections dated 29.3.10. Trial Court has allowed LA.7 and permitted the applicant to come on record as legal representative of the deceased plaintiff. Questioning the said order, defendants 8 and 9 have presented this writ petition.2. Sri D.R. Nagaraja, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners contends that the deceased plaintiff has sons and daughters, who are Class heirs and the Ist respondent being the grand son and not a legal heir, besides, the deceased plaintiff having had no absolute right to execute any document in respect of the suit property, the alleged gift deed and ...
The Karnataka Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd Vs. K Mohammed S/O ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. Appeal is by the complainant assailing the order of the Fast Track Court I, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada in Crl.A 286/2006 on 31.10.2008.2. The complainant had filed a complaint before the trial court alleging dishonour of the cheque issued by the accused. According to the complainant, accused had purchased fish on credit basis during 1996-1997 and Rs. 10,87,992/- was outstanding from him. Towards payment, he had issue a Cheque dated 2.8.2004 for Rs.5 lakhs. The cheque was dishonoured with an endorsement 'account closed'. After issuance of legal notice, compluini came to be filed as the accused did not make payment. The trial court held that the cheque was not dishonoured for any material alteration and the accused has also not replied to the legal notice issued and his defense is totally self contradictory. The trial court has also noted the evidence of DW 1 - Banker of the accused that, accused was issuing unreturned cheques and in this regard the banker had written a letter to the...
Prasanna Kumar H.S. S/O.Subbu Krishna Vs. State by Manila Police Shimo ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in Crime No.202/2010 registered for offered punishable under Sections 292, 292-A, 114, 293, 494 r/w. 34 of IPC by Manila police, Shimoga.2. Heard learned. Counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the State and I have gone through investigation records.3. The first informant is the mother of one Shruthi. The petitioner is alleged to have married said Shruthi by suppressing his first marriage with one PVabhavathi. The petitioner had taken photographs of said Shruthi when she was visiting the computer center run by petitioner. Petitioner is alleged to have taken the photograph with a girl and had blackmailed her. The mother of first informant came to know of the antecedents of petitioner and also his marriage with one Prabhavathi lodged first information alleging a fo restated offences. From the contents of first information, I find that petitioner had taken a second wife by suppressing his earlier marriage. Petitioner has als...
Sheik Mahamd Rehamatulla @ Mansur S/O. Rahim Saheb Vs. Sami Ahmed Majo ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-11-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant both on the ground of negligence as well as quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. This appeal coming on for orders, with the consent cf the 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 before the Tribunal.4. Brief facts of the case are:That on 14-11-01, when the claimant was travelling in TATA Sumo bearing registration No.KA-01-N-8577 along with his family members from Shimoga to Tarikere after attending a marriage function, near Bhadravathi bypass near Ujjcnipura Circle, driver of the vehicle drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident. As a result, the claimant sustained injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition before the MACT, Chickmagalur, seeking compensation of Rs.4,04,000/-. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,44,715/-with interest a...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »