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 Muniyappa Vs. Sn Gurappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. Heard the counsel for the appellant. The appellant was the plaintiff before the trial court in a suit for declaration and injunction. It was the case of the plaintiff that the father of the plaintiff and the father of the defendant were brothers and they constituted a Joint Hindu Family and that the defendant was the Kartha of the joint family, after the death of his father and the land bearing Sy.No.78/5 measuring one acre and three guntas was in the occupation of the joint family from the time of the father of the plaintiff and the defendant as tenants.2. The defendant who was the Kartha of the joint family, filed a declaration in Form No.7 before the Land Tribunal under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 for registration of occupancy rights and the Land Tribunal having granted occupancy rights in favour of the defendant by an order dated 17.01.1976, was for and on behalf of the joint family and the defendant being the Kartha of the joint family, claiming exclu...
Revanna Vs. Smt. K Prema, W/O. N. Manju,
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...
Bhagyamma, and ors Vs. H.E.Jayanna, S/O Eregowda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award in MVC No. 1452/2007 dated 16.11.2009 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hassan. The appellants were the claimants 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 appellants have filed mis appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.2. Learned Counsel for the appellants would contend that the deceased was working as a coolie and is also an agriculturist. He was earning more than Rs.6,C00/- per month. However, the Tribunal has erroneously taken his income at Rs.3,000/- per month. Therefore, the compensation awarded towards loss of dependency is grossly inadequate. Learned Counsel for the appellants has taken me through the evidence of the parties, the documents produced by the appell...
D. Nagaraj Tahasildar Vs. State Public Information Officer and 2. Umes ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate.2. Petitioner is the Tahsiltiar of Magadi Taluk. Respondent No.2 filed application to enroll as life member of Indian Red Cross Society by paying 250/-on 7.10.2004. Copy of the receipt for having paid the fee is produced at Annexure-A to the writ petition. However, nothing was heard from the office of the Red Cross Society in respect of second respondent's enrolment as a member of the society, an application came to be filed as per Annexure-B by respondent No.2 in the office of the petitioner on 1.1.2009 seeking information as to what has happened about the deposit of 250/- made by respondent No.2 and as to whether the said amount deposited is sent to the office of the Red Cross Society cr not. In spite of repeated requests, no information is given by the petitioner to the second respondent. The subsequent representation dated 6.1.2009 made by the second respondent is produced at Annexure-C. Even t...
N V Manjunath Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Heard petitioner's Counsel. Government Advocate is directed to take notice for respondents 1 to 3.2. In view of the short point involved, this petition is disposed of finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties.3. Petitioner is before this court seeking a direction to the respondents to give weight age of additional five years of service as the petitioner took voluntary retirement after completion of 20 years of service and in this regard, learned Counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to KCSR Rule 285(2)(v) & (vi) and also placed reliance on the Apex Court decision reported in (1995H SCC 507 and AIR 1990 SC 968 and the point which the petitioner's Counsel wants to drive home for relying on the aforesaid decisions is that the teachers employed in various Government aided private schools are also to be treated on par with the teachers in the Government school.4. In the light of the aforesaid submission made and the main grievance being the re...
Sri Ananda C Kundar and ors Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Advocate for respondents.2. The records reveal that committee of management was appointed by the second respondent as per the order Annexure-B dated 3.10.2007. The managing Committee was consisting of nine members. The period of managing committee was three years. Thus the term of the managing committee appointed by virtue of the order Annexure-B dated 3.10.2007 has expired w.e.f. from 3.10.2010. In view of the pendency of the matter before the Supreme Court and in view of interim order granted by the Apex Court in the said matter, the second respondent could not appoint new managing committee. Therefore by exercising jurisdiction under Section 29 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act. 1997, the second respondent has, appointed an Administrator.3. The petitioners herein are the former members of the managing committee. By filing this writ petition, they have prayed for continuation of t...
S.Sudeep. Vs. Oriental Insurance Company
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
;1. This appeal by the appellant is arising out of the impugned judgment and award dated 10/12/2004 passed in MVC No.210/2002 on the file of the IX Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-VII, Bangalore (SCCH-7), (hereinafter referred to as ' Tribunal' for short).2. The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of 40,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, as against the claim of the appellant for a sum of 11,310/-, for the damages caused to Mercedes Benz Car bearing No. KA-05-Z 27, in the road traffic accident.3. The appellant claims to be the owner of the Mercedes Benz Car bearing No. KA-G5-Z 27 has filed a claim petition under section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation of 1,11,310/- for the damages caused to the said car in the accident that occurred en 9.7.2001 at about 8.00 p.m. due to the rash and negligent driving of the Maruti Zen Car bearing No.KA.05.F.9828 near 2nd Main sa...
State of Karnataka, Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment and order dated 2.11.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mandya in S.C.No.93/2002, acquitting the respondent - accused of the charges leveled against him for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and Section 3 (2) (v) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 1989.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under: The prosecutrix examined as PW.7 is the daughter of PW.9-Rani and they are members of schedule caste. Husband of PW.9 one Raju left her about 3 years prior to March 2002 and thereafter PW.9 came to her parental village in Arakere in Mandya District and started living with her daughter PW.7 in a house belonging to the father of PW.8-Madamma. Thereafter PW.9 developed illicit relationship with the accused Nasarulla @ Babu. Resident of Arakere and he also started residing with PW.9 in the same house. On 20.3.2002 morning PW.9 left the house tor coolie work. At that time PW.7....
M/S. B.N.Padmanabhaiah and anr Vs. B.G.Sreenivasa Rao, and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. Defendants 1 and 2 in O.S.404/04 pending on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Tumkur, have filed these writ petitions to quash the order passed by the Trial Court dismissing the applications filed by them to recall PW-1 for cross-examination. 2. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed the suit against the petitioners and respondents 3 and 4 herein, for a decree of ejectment and manse profits in respect of the plaint schedule premises. Defendants have contested the suit by filing written statement. Trial having been commenced, for the plaintiffs, PW-1 has deposed. PW-1 having not been cross-examined was discharged. Two applications were filed by the defendants on 25.6.10 i.e., to re-open the case, recall PW-1 and permit the cross-examination. The prayers in the applications were opposed by the plaintiffs. The Trial Court having considered the applications, finding them to be devoid of merit, has dismissed the same. These writ petitions are directed against the said common order...
Smt Kamala Vs. Babu Kanchan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant 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 20.06.2005, when the claimant was walking on the side of the Haklady Bhajana Mandira-Toplu Road, near Chillare Gudde Ganigara House, a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-20-K-5065 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 MACT, Kundapura seeking compensation of Rs.5,75,000/-. The Tribunal awarded her a compensation of Rs. 1.20,400/- with interest at 6% p.a.5. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of accident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only point that...
- ‹ Prev
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- Next ›
- Last »