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.
K Kochu Shetty Vs. the V Land Tribunal and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This Writ Appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the learned single Judge who has dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellant on the ground of delay and latches.2. The appellant is a veil educated person retired as an Engineer from KEB Services, he filed Form No. 7 seeking exclusive sub-tenancy rights of lands as against his brother who represented the mother in the proceedings. His grievance is, the application filed by the mother and him and others in respect of the same land were not clubbed together, no common order is passed and he was not notified by the Land Tribunal. In those circumstances when the order is passed on 14 8.1981 granting occupancy rights in favour of his mother and others, he preferred the Writ Petition in 1993 in challenging the said order. 'Hie learned single Judge on considering the cause shown for delay in approaching this Court was of the view that the cause shown by him do not constitute sufficient cause. He was not diligent, in making en...
Mr. Simon Jerald C. Lobo and ors Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDERJ.S.KHEHAR, C.J. (Oral):1. Counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent has been filed in Court today. The same is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. A copy thereof has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner.2. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the resolution dated 08.02.2010, whereby, the petitioner, has been required to install GPS equipment on his vehicle(s), for the transportation of sand. The clause of the impugned endorsement dated 08.02.2010, which is subject matter of challenge, through the instant writ petition is being extracted hereunder:"It is decided to install GPS equipment in the vehicles transporting sand, in order to prevent the illegal transportation of sand to Kerala State. It was also decided that no sand shall be loaded to the Lorries transporting sand and if any violation is found in this regard, strict action would be initiated against the lease holders."3. It is the submission of the learned couns...
Satelite Recreation Association Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. This petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents net to insist upon the petitioner to obtain the license to carry on the lawful activities in the premises of the petitioner's Association either under the Police Act or under the provisions of Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order and not to interfere in the play of games like dart games, chess, rummy, poker, wall ball, coin games. Carom etc., which are the games of skill.3. The issue is no more res integral. It is covered by the two decisions of this Court. The order, dated 12th February. 2002 passed in Writ Petition No. 1764 of 2002, reads as follows:"3 I hold that the Petitioner's Association is not required to obtain any license under the Licensing and. Controlling of Places of Public Amusements (Bangalore City) Order 1989. for the purpose of mining outdoor and indoor games, music and dance, yoga and other cultural or recreational activities. However, if the petitioner found to be indulgin...
Sri M. Ameer Pasha Vs. M. Azeez Pasha
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Petitioners filed O.S.1009/09 against the respondent for partition and separate possession of their share in the plaint schedule properties. Along with the suit, an application seeking temporary injunction to restrain defendant from making any further construction on the fourth item of the plaint schedule property was filed. The respondent / defendant have filed written statement and also objections to I.A 1. Upon consideration, the Trial Court allowed i.A.l and passed an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant from putting up any kind of further construction in the first item of the suit schedule property. Aggrieved, the defendant filed appeal in M.A.76/09 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Mysore. The appellate Court has allowed the appeal and set aside the order under challenge before it. Aggrieved, the plaintiffs have filed this writ petition.2. Sri T. N. Raghupathy, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the respondent / defendant has complet...
Mr. Noor Mohammed, and ors Vs. the Commissioner, the Bruhat Bengaluru ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDERThe petitioners have sought the writ of mandamus to the respondent Nos.l and 2 to collect the property tax from the respondent No.3 for the period 1994 to 2010.2. Sri Ajesh Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent No.3 was a lessee under the petitioners in respect of the property in question. As per the deed of lease, dated 7.6.1971, the liability to pay the property tax to the Corporation/Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike ('BBMP' for short) is that of the third respondent only. He brings to my notice the provisions contained in Section 108A(6) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 ('the said Act' for short) which read as follows:"108A. Levy and calculation of property tax in respect of Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike.-(6) The person primarily liable to pay the property tax shall pay the tax in two equal installments. The first being before 30th May and second by 29th November of each financial year. However, the owner or occupie...
Sameeulla S/O Amanulla Major Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.2 and 3 in Cr.No. 111/2009 registered for offence under Sections 341, 363, 307 read with 34 of IPC. They have sought for antkipalnxy bail2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the State.3 The statement of eye witness would reveal that on 06.04.2009 at about 11 p.m., when the victim vras going near his house, petitioners and other accused came in an Auto ricks haw, kidnapped him, assaulted him with deadly weapons accused threw him near Ping Road at Mysore. The Wound Certificate would reveal that trie victim had suffered as marry as eight stab injuries. The eye witness has stated the name of petitioner and also his participation in the commission of offence. The incident took place in the wake of communal disturbance that had taken place, in the City of Mysore. The custodial of accused for interrogation is necessary for proper investigation of the case. Therefore, petition 1B dismissed....
Smt. Usha V, Kumar Vs. Srt Vittala Kumar N. S/O M.Narayana Rao.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner-wife of the respondent herein is before this Court praying to transfer the case in M.C. No.68/2008 pending on the tile of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) at Shimogei to the Family Court at Bangalore, where C.Mkc.50?/2QGS is pending.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as on the date of filing of M.C.No.68/2008 by the respondent the petitioner was living at Bangalore. He also submits that the petitioner has filed C.Misc.No.507/2008 under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and the same is pending on the file of the Family Court at Bangalore. Hence, he prays that the case in M.C.No.68/2008 pending on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) at Shimoga, may be withdrawn and made over to the Family Court at Bangalore and try the same along with C.Misc.No.507/2008.3. Learned counsel for the respondent submit that the petitioner is working and earning 9,000/-p.m. and there is no impediment far her to attend the Court at Shimoga and therefore, she cannot seek transfer of case f...
The Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Marakamma W/O Huchap ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. These appeals are filed by the Insurance Company appellant - Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 26.07.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) ana Addl. MACT, Sorab.2. The grounds taken by the appellant is that the Tribunal has committed an error while awarding compensation without examining the facts that liability of insurance in case of Act policy. The injured are inmates of the vehicle in tempo trax bearing No.KA-01/M-6164, which was met with accident cine to rash and negligent driving of the driver.3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the vehicle, which was insured with the appellant is an Act policy. He has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Orient! Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sudhakaran K,V. 8B Others, reported in CDJ 2008 SC 1040 arid another judgment of this Court in the case of United Insurance Co Ltd. v. C.S. Anil Kumar and others reported, in LLP 2008 KA.R 4163, whereas the judgment of Supreme Court and this Cour...
Deveeramma and ors Vs. Sudhakar S/O. Venkatesh and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
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 learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.3. For the sake of convenience parties art referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.4. Brief facts of the case are:That on 7-4-07. When the deceased Hanumaiah was proceeding with one Marigowda and carrying vegetables in a Canter bearing registration No. KA-i3-A-911, towards Hassan on N.H.48, Bangalore -Hassan road, a tipper lorry bearing registration No. KA-01-T-129 which was going ahead of the Canter stopped abruptly in (his middle of the road without giving any signal, as a result of which the Canter hit the lorry and caused the accident. As a result, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. His wife and two major sons filed a claim petition before the MACT, Bangalore, and seeking com...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. D.V.Shankar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This is claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in MVC No.5924/2002 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore.2. Hie fact that the claimant was riding a Bajaj Boxer motor cycle on 16.10.2002 along with two pillion riders. The said motor cycle met with an accident on Nil - 48 near Bellur Cross involving bus bearing No.KA 11 9900 belonging to first respondent and insured with second respondent are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that in the said accident, the claimant suffered fracture of fibula, fracture of pelvis right side, fracture of aliac bone, fracture of fifth metacarpal bone, comminuted fracture of left radius and other minor injuries.3. Thereafter, the claimant filed a claim petition seeking compensation in a sum of ".3.00,000/- from the owner of the insurer of the bus bearing No.KA 11 9900.4. In the court below, respondent adduced evidence as PW-1 and also adduced evidence through Doctor, who treated him while he was in Hospit...
- ‹ Prev
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- Next ›
- Last »