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.
The Special Land Accuisition Officer Mysore Vs. Mahadev S/O Huchappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. This revision under Sec.115 of CPC is directed against the order dated 31/10/2009 in LA.C.No.402/0* on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Mysore, allowing the petition under Sec. 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act and directing the petitioner herein to send reference to the court within 30 days for adjudication.2. Petition is posted for admission. Perused the records.3. The respondent herein, whose lands in Sy.No. 134/7 measuring 0.25 guntas situated at Sarkari Uttanahalli Village, Varuna Hobli, Mysore Taluk, were acquired for purpose of formation of sites, received compensation in pursuance to the award on 24/3/2004 through cheque and then filed an application under Sec.18 of the Karnataka Special Land Acquisition Act on 12/4/2004, for referring the matter to the court for Getermining the enhanced compensation.4. The LAO failed to make reference to the court onthe ground, the request of the respondent was belated.5. Aggrieved by such inaction on the part of the petitioner her...
Valli D'Souza, S/o late Siril D'Souza, Vs. Purre Gowda, S/o Nanjegowda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award in MVC No.425/2000 dated 3.5.2010 on the tile of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hassan. The appellant was the claimant before the Tribunal and the respondents were the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle. There is no dispute as to the occurrence of the accident and the liability of the second respondent - Insurance Company to pay compensation. The appellant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that the Doctor, who had treated the claimant, had opined that the claimant had suffered 28% permanent disability to the particular limb. The claimant was a driver by profession. He is working with the BSNL It is contended that after retirement, the claimant could have gainfully employed by driving private vehicles. Having regard to the permanent disability sustained by him in the accident, he cannot drive the ve...
S N Basavarajappa and ors Vs. Sri Ramachandrappa and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. The 1st respondent/plaintiff has filed O.S.No.137/2007 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.,) at Sagar, against the petitioners and respondents 2 & 3/defendants for partition and separate possession claiming v2 share in the plaint schedule properties. The claim of the plaintiff has been resisted by filing written statement. I.A No.18 was filed by the petitioners seeking permission of the court to amend the written statement, to which the plaintiff filed statement of objections and the learned trial judge finding the application to be untenable, has passed an order of rejection. Aggrieved, the defendants have filed this writ petition.2. Sri Mahesh R.Uppin, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners contended that, the proposea amendment sought for by introducing the factum of prior partition between the parties is just and necessary to effectively decide the suit i.e., to decide the real questions in controversy between the parties, ought to have been permitted to be incor...
Sanath Vs. Subramanyan and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by him Tribunal.2. Heard, the appeal is admitted and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the partj.ee, it is taken up for final disposal.3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred i:o as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.4. The brief facts of the case:On 02.02.2007, when the claimant was travelling in a bus bearing registration No.KA-20-A-7087 near Huliyaragoli Village, near Kothalakatte, NH-17 road, a tanker bearing registration No.KA-01-C-3697 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bus. As a res-alt, the claimant sustained injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition before MACT, Udupi seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-, The Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.44,,195/- with interest at 8%p.a.5. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of accident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Sri.S.H.Lakshmana
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.4710/2004 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 injuries sustained are not in dispute. The claimant claims to be aged about 40 years, an agriculturist by profession, earning more than . 5,000/-p.m. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident. He sustained injuries such as fracture of both bones of right leg type 3 type 3 compound fracture of shaft numerous, fracture of left ulna, fracture of clavicle right. He has taken treatment in hospital as inpatient for a period of 101 days and underwent five surgeries. The doctor has assessed the physical disability to the extent of 73% and 20% to 24% to the whole body. He claimed that he had spent considerable am...
Bhagyamma Vs. the Oriental Insurance Co Ltd
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 the teamed counsel appearing for the parties, it is tocsin 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 21.09.2006, when the deceased Puttappa was standing on the side of the road with IhN Inspector near RTO Office near G.RHalli Village between 8 & 9 kma, Stona. Ctiitradurga Taluk District and when the vehicles were stopped for checking, a lorry KA-01-B-383 came from behind in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot, Hence, hie will, father and son filed a claim petition before MACT, Bangalore seeking compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/-. The Tribunal awarded them a compensation of Rs.3,42,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.5. As there is n...
Saraswathi. W/O GavigowdA. Vs. Keshavamurthy and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award in MVC No.271/2009 dated 16.4.2010 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn ) and Audi. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Hassan. The appellant was the claimant before the Tribunal and the respondents were the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle. There is no dispute as to the occurrence of the accident and the liability of the second respondent - Insurance Company to pay compensation. The appellant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.3. Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that the claimant had suffered 25% disability to the particular limb. She was earning more than 200/- per day. The Tribunal has assessed her income at ?100/- per day, which is on a lower side. it is further argued that having regard to the injuries sustained by her, the compensation awarded towards pain kid suffering, loss of amenities, conveyance, nourishment...
M M Jayakumar S/O.M P Muddappa and ors Vs. the State of Karnataka and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Sri M R Rajagopal, learned counsel for the petitioners, has filed a memo reading as under:This memo is confined to the first petitioner and liberty he reserved to file independent writ petitions for rest of the petitions [sic]. This will not prejudice the petitioner to workout their right if any and same may kindly be recorded in the ends of justice and equity and submits that the memo may be ordered.2. In the wake of like order passed by this court in WP Nos 11640-42 of 2010 and other related writ petitions, the memo is ordered and WP Nos 16344-63 of 2010 are dismissed with liberty to these petitioners to present fresh separate writ petitions, but court lee already paid herein is to be treated as court fee payable for the corresponding writ pet tions of each of the petitioner.3. Subject to above observation and orders, these writ petitions are dismissed.4. Registry is directed to return the documents/ annexure produced along with the petition relatable to these petitioners, wh...
Sri N G Halappa S/O Late Gaganna Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Heard the petitioner's Advocate and learned Addl. Government Advocate for respondents.Petitioner was running a fair price shop in Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumkur District. However, the Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur, cancelled the authorisation granted in favour of the petitioner oil the ground that the petitioner has committed certain illegalities/ irregularities in distribution of essentia.1 commodities. The order of the Deputy Commidsioner, Tumkur was questioned before the Commissioner, Bangalore-Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority has confirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner. Both the orders are called in question in this writ petition.2. At the time of passing the impugned order Armexure-E, the Deputy Commissioner of Tumkur District was Mr. H.R. Srinivas. He passed the impugned order Anncamre-E cancelling the authorisation granted in favour of the petitioner. The very same officer Mr. H.R. Srinivas is promoted and is posted as Ccramissioner for Food and Civil...
M/S. Carpenters Classic Exim (P) Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Executive Engi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Sri. S.P. Shankar. Learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner has handed over a D.D. for Rs. 1.40.250/-and a postdated cheque dated 30.11.2010 for Rs. 1.40.250/-drawn in favour of die 2nd respondent to the learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent towards damages for use and occupation of he premises by the petitioner. Sri. B.M. Shyam Prasad learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent has received the same without prejudice to the contentions of the 2nd respondent in O.S. No. 15038/2005 pending on the file of the Additional City Civil Judge. Bangalore.2. The 2nd respondent has filed a memo stating the 2nd Respondent has no objection for restoration of power supply to the premises in occupation of the petitioner. In the said memo, it is further stated that he has no objection for the BESCOM authorities to have free access to the meter board bearing RR No. AEH 37452 situated within the premises in occupation of the 2nd respondent, Learned Counsel for the 2nd responden...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »