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.
State Bank of Mysore Vs. B. T. Venkatesh
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. The respondent herein claiming to be aggrieved by the communication dated 06.01.2003 by which the request for accepting his application for voluntary retirement was rejected, had assailed the same in W.P.No.4072/2003 iS-Rj. The respondent herein also sought for a direction to accept his application dated 14.02.2001. The learned Single Judge by order dated 25.09.2006 has quashed the impugned communication and directed the appellant herein to accept the application for voluntary retirement and relieve the respondent herein and grant all consequential benefits. The appellant herein claiming to be aggrieved by the said order has filed this intra-Court appeal.2. The brief facts are that the appellant-Bank introduced the voluntary retirement scheme (SBM VRS) dated 27.01.2001 under Staff Circular No. 121/2000-01.The eligibility criterion was indicated therein. Similarly the other requirements as well as the discretion of the appellant-Bank were also indicated. The respondent herein claimin...
Maithra Devi Vs. B .Thyagaraju S/O Basappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. Heard. The delay of 341 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Misc.Cvl.5712/2009 is allowed accordingly. Misc.Cvi. 14294/2009 filed for permission to file the appeal is also allowed.2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 18.01.2008 passed by the Court of III Additional District Judge, Tumkur, in P & SC No.23/2007. By the impugned order, the Court below has allowed the petition filed by the respondent herein for grant of a probate under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925M.F.A.No.2228/2009 and Misc.Cvl.Nos.5712, 14294 & 5713 Of 2009 ['the Act' for short) by granting a probate in respect of the will dated 18.09.2006 executed by one Renukamma.3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the respondent, ought to have arrayed the appellant as a party to the aforesaid probate proceeding and the respondent has obtained the probate by playing fraud on the trial Court.4. On being asked as to whether the case of the appellant would fall within the ambit ...
R.Gourav Vs. A.Shariff and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 14th Tribunal-4. Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-4),(For short, Tribunal) for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of 17,71,000/- awarded in favour of the claimant as against his claim for 40.00 Lakhs, is inadequate.2. The facts in brief are that, the appellant is the minor son of the deceased late Ramakrishna. The minor son represented by his guardian filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that at about 5:50 P.M. on 06-10-1998, the deceased Ramakrishna met with an accident, near Chord Road on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Lorry bearing No.TN-04/A-4006. Due to the impact, he sustained severe injuries and died on the spot.3. It is the case of the appellant that, the deceased was aged about 38 years, working as Advocate, earning a sum of 9,000/- per month and on account of his untimely death, ...
R.Gourav Vs. A.Shariff and Ars
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal by the appellant is arising out of the impugned judgment and award dated 14/12/2004 passed in MVC No.3478/2000 on the file of the 18th Addl Judge. Court of Small Causes and MACT-IV. Bangalore (SCCH-4), (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal" for short).2. By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of ?4,65,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its deposit, as against the claim made by the appellant for a sum of ?30,00,000/- on account of the death of the deceased Smt. N. Nagaveni in the road traffic accident.3. The appellant being minor represented by his Guardian, has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondent on account, of the death of his mother Smt. M. Nagaveni in the accident that occurred on 6.10.1998 at about 5.50 p.m., near W.C. road near Modi Hospital, due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry b...
Sri.K.Muniyappa Vs. the Secretary to the Revenue Department State of K ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This is plaintiffs appeal against the Judgment and decree in O.S.No.8674/1997 dated 7.10.2C04 on the file of XXVII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore.2. Parties will be referred to as per their ranking in the trial court.3. Plaintiff sought for decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and restraining them from demolishing the existing compound wall.4. Case of the plaintiff is that, plaintiff and one Maranna are the sons of one Kalappa. Kalappa got the occupancy rights under the Inam Abolition Act from the Special Deputy Commissioner in respect of 2 acres 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.54 of Channasandra village. After the death of Kalappa. The said property was orally divided between the plaintiff and his brother Maranna. Land measuring 1 acre 2 guntas was given to the plaintiff and khata was changed in the name of plaintiff and plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the same. He co...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Smt.Kamalamma R and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal by the insurer is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 14.02.2007 passed in MVC No.4054/2004 on the file of the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member. Prl. MACT, Metropolitan area, Bangalore, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal for short).2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-The occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. The claimants, who are respectively the wife, daughter and son of the deceased, filed the claim petition before the Tribunal against the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle claiming compensation. They claimed that on account of the untimely death of the deceased, who was aged about 45 years as on the date of death, an agriculturist and also running a provisional store, earning ?5,000/ p.m., and was the sole bread winner in the family, their security, future hopes and aspirations have been jeopardized. The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award, has awarde...
Mrs. Umashankari Major, W/O K.Doreswamy. and Mrs. Mallika and Mrs.Devi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. All these three appeals are disposed of by this common judgment. In all these appeals the appellants who are some of the defendants in the suit are questioning the compromise petition on various grounds, interalia it is not in conformity with Order XXIII Rule 3-B of die Code of Civil Procedure.2. RFA 1581/03 is filed by defendant Nos. 11. 12 and 13. RFA 1585/03 is filed by defendant Nos. 2(d) and 2ie) and RFA No. 11 /04 is filed by defendant No.5.3. During the course of judgment the parties would be referred as per their ranking in the trial Court.4. The factual matrix of the case can be summarized as follows:Original plaintiff No.l A.K. Babu Kumar since deceased filed suit in O.S. No.l 190/87 for partition and separate possession in respect of various suit schedule properties. The porosities is one A. V. Kumaraswamy Mudaliar who had in all 12 children, i.e., plaintiff, defendant Nos. 1 to 10 and K. Doraiswamy who died on 13.4.1985 and his widow is arrayed as 11th defendant and his ...
State of Karnataka Vs. T.Jayanna and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1 .Respondents 1 & 2 (hereinafter refilled to as 'accused 1 & 2') were tried and acquitted for offences under sections 7 and 13(l)(d)(ii), punishable under section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1988 (for short, 'the Act'). Therefore. appellant/Lokayuktu police has filed this appeal.2. 1 have heard Sri S.G.Rajendra Reddy. learned counsel for appellant/Lokayukta police and Sri S.K.Venkata Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 1 & 2/accused 1 & 2.3. In brief, the case of prosecution is as follows: -During the month of January 2000, leasehold rights of certain shops situate in Town Municipality Complex at Sira was sold in public auction. PW7-Mohammed Ibrahim was a successful bidder of shop No. 14 of the Town Municipal Complex at Sira. He had agreed to pay monthly rent of Rs.2.000/- and security deposit of Rs.4.25.000/-. Accused No. 1, who was the Chief Officer of Town Municipality at Sira, had to execute agreement of lease in favour of PW7 in respect of aforestated shop.It is...
Wajeed S/O Sardar Sab Vs. the State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner No. 1 and 2 are arrayed as accused No.2 and 3 in FOC No.82/10-11 of Range Forest Officer, Kudligere Branch, Bhadravathi Taluk, registered for offences punishable under Sections50, 62, 80, 104(A) of Karnataka Forest Act and 127 (A) of Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969.2. On 5.8.2010, the complainant Range Forest Officer of Kudligere Branch and his staff received credible information that three persons were concealing wooden rosewood billets. Therefore, they reached the place of occurrence and found that three persons were concealing three rosewood billets each measuring 1.5 mts. They apprehended one person, other two persons ran away from the place. The arrested person disclosed his name as also the names of other two persons.3. The learned counsel for petitioner would submit that petitioners are being implicated on the basis of confessional statement made by co-accused. Therefore, there is no prima-facie case. The confessional statement made by co-accused may not be a...
The Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd and Mujeeb Baig Mahaboob B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
:1. These two appeals by the Insurer and the claimant are directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 05/10/2004 passed in MVC No. 713/2002 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & GJM & II Addl. MACT, Davangere, (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal' for short).2. By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of 71,840/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization and directed the Insurer to pay the said amount with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle against the claim made by the claimant for a sum of ^10,00,000/-, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident.3. The occurrence of the accident and the resultant injuries sustained by the claimant are not in dispute. On account of the injuries sustained by the claimant, he has filed a claim petition under section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the driver, owner and Insurer of the offending vehicle. The said ...
- ‹ Prev
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- Next ›
- Last »