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.
Smt S H Rajalakshmi and ors Vs. Veerahanumappa and anr
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. The appeal xa by the claimants for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Heard, the appeal is admitted and with the current of the 'earned 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 01.08.2001, when the deceased Ugranarasappa after getting down from KSRTC bus near Vaddanahalli Gate, NH-4 and while walking on the road, the driver of the canter bearing registration No.KA-06-A-675 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. As a result, be sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. Hence, his wife, two major sons and en Lurnarried daughter filed a claim petition before the MACT, Sira seeking compensation of Rs.25,00,000/. The Tribunal awarded them a compensation of Rs 2,99,500/- with interest at 6% p.a.5. As there is no dispute regarding death of the deceased in a...
Smt. Papamma Vs. Sri. Rudrachari
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Heard.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 7-3-07, when the claimant was standing near Uttam Sagar Hotel, a motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-18-H-2295 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against her. As a result the claimant sustained injuries. Hence, she filed a claim petition before the MACT, Bangalore, and seeking compensation of ^.3,80.000/-. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award has awarded compensation of 76,875/- with interest at 6% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal the claimant is in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.5. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of accident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, Mie only point that remains for my consideration in the app...
Smt.M.M.Jhansi, Vs. the Karnataka State Tourism Development Corporatio ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner was appointed on daily wages as receptionist in the respondent-KSTDC and she sought for regularization of service by approaching this court by way of Writ Petition Nos. 6171/1991 and 49619/2003 and finally, the respondent regularized her services by issuing the order dated 19.7.2008 (Annexure-D). The only grievance of the petitioner is that, the regularization was given effect from 1.7.2008, whereas the petitioner joined as a daily wager on 10.7.1985 and. therefore, she ought to have been regularized in service from the said date i.e., 10.7.1985.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to the order passed as per Annexure-D, contended that when once the petitioner is regularized in sentence, the effect should have been given from the date of her appointment i.e., from 10.7 1985. and not from 1.7.2008 and secondly, the conditions imposed while regularizing her services also are not applicable co the petitioner as her appointment was not made on 1.7.2008...
K.P.Jayanna S/O. Porappa, Vs. M/S. the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 26th February 2005, passed in M.V.C.No.908/1995. By the I Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn). Motor Accident ClaimsTribunal, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore (for short Tribunal) for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of 75,910/-awarded in his favour as against his claim for ^06.00 lakhs, is inadequate.2. The appellant claims to be aged about 38 years, working as Coolie. Ke was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That at about 10:30 P.M., on 12-10-1994, when the appellant along with others was returning to Tumkur in a Metador bearing No.KA-06/3984, near Dabaspete, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the said Metador, it dashed against the parked Canter bearing No.KA-04/564. As. a result of the same, the appellant sustained fracture of both bones of right leg, crush injury on the right foot with fracture and dislocation of hip bon...
Smt Gangamma W/0 Late Ramaiah Vs. Smt Lakskmamma W/0 Late Thimmappa an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. There is a delay of 159 days in filing this review petition. Before issuing notice on the application for condemnation of delay, I thought it fit In hear the review petition both on the question of condensation of delay and also on the merits of the matter.2. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I find that there is no apparent illegality or error in the order passed by this Court which warrants review of the same.3. As could be seeairom paragraph No.6 of the order, amendment sought for in so far as alteration of the boundaries mentioned in the plaint has been rejected holding that it was a poet trial amendment for altering the boundaries, of the suit schedule properties and the same therefore, cannot be allowed.4. Further, as regards the measurement of the property sought to be amended, this Court has allowed the request while dismissing the writ petition. Hence, I find no apparent illegality or error in the order.5. As I do not find any apparent illegality in ...
Mohammed Kaleemulla Tonse and ors Vs. the Kalyanpura Grama Panchayath ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
J.S.Khehar, C.J. (Oral)1. Misc.W.5452/2010 has been filed at the hands of the learned counsel for the applicants/appellants for condensation of delay of 31 days in filing the appeal. Learned counsels for the respondents have no objection to the acceptance of the prayer made in the application for condensation of delay.2. On account of the factual position depicted in the application for condensation of delay, as also on account of no objection from the learned counsel for the non-applicants/respondents, the instant Misc.W. is allowed. 31 days' delay in filing the main appeal is hereby condoned.3. The appellants herein approached this Court, by filing Writ Petition No.27122/2005. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of, by an order dated 17.2.2009. The operative part of the aforesaid order is being extracted hereunder:"5. For the aforesaid reasons, Annexure-H be treated as show cause notice issued to the petitioner for which, he is directed to submit his reply within a period of fo...
G Parameshwarappa and ors Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER J.S.KHEHAR, C.J. (Oral):1. The State of Karnataka approved the establishment of a Primary Health Centre at Vijapur Village, Chitradurga Taluk on 19.3.1996. However, through a corrigendum dated 17.10.1996, the Primary Health Centre approved to be established at Vijapur Village, was relocated at Lakshmisagar village in Chitradurga Taluk.2. It is the instant action at the hands of the respondents that has resulted in filing of the instant writ petition. The petitioners placed reliance on a gift deed dated 27.8.2007 depicting the transfer of 2 acres of land in Sy.No.130 by the Chitradurga Education Society to the State Government, for the purpose of setting up of the Primary Health Centre in village Vijapur, to contend that there is no difficulty in setting up the Primary Health Centre at Vijapur village3. In order to authenticate the veracity of the gift deed, learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the fact, that aforesaid land was handed over to the Deputy Commi...
B.L.Jayesha S/O Late B.T.Lingappa Gowda Vs. the Station House Officer ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner married deceased K.S.Nivediiha on 6.6.2010. At the time of marriage, the petitioner had demanded and accepted dowry. After the marriage, the deceased was living in the house of petitioner. The petitioner had subjected the deceased to cruelty in connection with dowry demand. Therefore, she committed suicide on 14.7.2010 in the house of petitioner.2. The learned counsel for petitioner referring to the first information and further statement given by the father of deceased would submit that in the first information, father of deceased has stated that he had already paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and in further statement he has stated that he had given 20 pavans of gold as dowry and assured to given remaining sum of 2 Dakhs (dowry) after the marriage. The learned counsel for petitioner referring to these discrepancies would submit that the entire case is concocted. The learned counsel has also produced the copy of S.B.account passbook of the mother of petitioner to show...
M/S.Circos Coffee Works Vs. Sri Chhidganaswamigalu
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. This petition is directed against the order dated 19.10.2010 in Misc.800/10 n the file of Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, rejecting the petition,2. Heard Sri M.S.Rajendta Prasad, learned senior advocate for the petitioner, and examined the records made available.3. From the records, the factual matrix manifesting is that 1st petitioner-M/s Circos Coffee Works represented by Sri K.R.Gnanamurthy claims to be the tenant under Ganjam Mutt which has filed a suit in O.S.611/94 to restrain them (petitioners) from making any alterations or addition on the structure leased to them. Another suit in O.S.988/99 is filed seeking their eviction from the premises in question. O.S.611/94 is filed by the respondent herein and not by the Mutt which, according to the petitioners, has inducted them into the premises. In the meantime, Misc. 468/06 came to be filed by one B.M.Rajashekar and others under Section 92, C.P.C. with the principal prayer to remove the 2nd defendant ther...
The Special Land Acquisition Officer Karnataka and ors Vs. Sri Jayaram ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. This petition is by the special land acquisition officer and chief executive officer of Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, who are before this court in this writ petition complaining about the order passed by the learned judge of the executing court viz., Civil Judge (Sr Dn), Bangalore rural district, wherein the petitioners stand in the position of judgment debtors.2. Respondents 1 and 2 being legal heirs of one B Yella Reddy, whose land, it appears, the petitioners-board had acquired for some purported public purpose, is required to compensate the owner in terms of an award either as passed by the land acquisition officer or if it has been modified in further reference or appeal, as per the final orders of the reference court or even this court in appeal etc., in such proceedings.3. The present writ petition is in the background of such proceedings pending before the executing court at the instance of the land owner on the complaint that the petitioners herein have ...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »