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.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Sri Gangarangaiah 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.4709/2004 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 is not in dispute. Initially, the injured-Gangarangaiah filed in claim petition under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act before the Tribunal against the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle claiming compensation on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident. Later on. he succumbed to the injuries and his parents-respondents 1(a) and 1(b) got themselves imp leaded and continued the claim petition before the Tribunal. They claimed that on account of the untimely death of the deceased, who was aged about 20 years as on the date of death, an agriculturist getting income of Rs.3250/-p.m., the sole bread...
M/S Sahakar Builders and Mr,hanif Velli Mohammed Vs. Johnson Benet S/O ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. In this writ petition, petitioner is calling in question the order dated 25.11.2005 passed by the learned f1 Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.}, Mangalore, D.K. dismissing I.A,No.2.2. Petitioner is the 6th defendant in the trial Court in O.S.No. 123/2004. The said suit is filed by respondents 1 to 3 herein seeking the relief of declaration that the transfer of plaint schedule property as per the documents were null and void as the same were executed without any valid and proper permission and authorization from the. 3 defendant-Trust and consequently defendants 1, 2 and 6 were liable to hand over the possession of the plaint schedule property to the 3- defendant-Tn Justin view of the fact that the lease hold rights of defendants 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 had come to and end.3. The 6th defendant, who claims to be the purchaser of the property from the 3rd defendant-Trust has filed the application under Order VTi Rule 11(b) and (dj of CPC seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that t...
S. NagarajA. Vs. the Divisional Controller B M T C, and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner party-in-person has come up before this court seeking a direction to the respondent - Corporation to accord promotion to the petitioner from the post of conductor to that of Assistant Traffic Inspector and the main ground put forward in the petition is that the petitioner has been working as a conductor for a long period of time and has not been given any promotion as Assistant Traffic Inspector.2. Having heard the party-in-person to the above effect and on perusal of the papers annexed to the writ petition, except the 'call notice', no other documents are produced to show the number of years of service put in as conductor and what criteria is there for being considered for the post of Assistant Traffic Inspector. Though the party-in-person placed for my perusal an order of the Corporation dated 22.5.81 to submit that, though he was appointed as Badali conductor, has been absorbed on probation with effect from 1.4.81. Yet no other material is placed as regards th...
Smt.Kusuma, And Ors Vs. Felix D Souza, S/o.late J.B.D' Souza And Ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. The petitioners are before this Court under Section 24 of CPC praying to transfer the case in MVC No.599/2008 pending on the file of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.)/Addl. M.A.C.T at Arakalagud, to the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge/Addl. M.A.C.T at Mangalore, and club MVC No.599/2008 with MVC No 1662/2008, which is pending on the file of II Addl. District Judge/Addi. M ACT at Mangalore.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Respondents 3 and 4 herein are the in-laws of the Petitioner No.l and they have flies a claim petition in M.V.C.No.599/2008 pending on the file of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.)/Addl. M.A.C.T at Arakalagud, seeking compensation towards death of Kumar, who died in the motor accident. He further submits that the petitioners/wife and minor children of the deceased Kumar also have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which is registered in MVC No. 3 662/2008 on the file of District Judge/Addl. M.A.C.T at Mangalore. And th...
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. K.R Suresh
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. Since this appeal is filed for admission, with the consent of both the parties, the appeal he taken up of final disposal2. This appeal is by the insurance company challenging the judgment and award passed in MVC No. 541/2001, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Tumkur The court by its order dated 07.03.2007 has awarded a compensation of. 1,28,603/-. The appellant lias taken a ground that since the owner of the offending vehicle has violated the permit conditions for which the insurance company cannot be made liable. In respect of the said contention learned counsel referred to a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd., v. Challa Bharathamma and Others, 2004 ACJ 2094 wherein it was clearly held that is a commercial vehicle is plied without a permit, then there is no liability on the insurance. This aspect has not been considered by the Tribunal.3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the claimant has submitted th...
P.Krishnappa S/O Puttegowda Vs. H.R.Chandrashekaraiah S/O Late L.Raman ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. The appellant was the defendant before the trial court in a suit for recovery of possession. It was contended that the defendant was put in possession of the suit property under an "agreement of mortgage", (sic) which was for a period of three years and on expiry of the same, the plaintiff was before the Court seeking recovery of possession. The defendant contends that a sum of 10,000/- was paid as consideration for the so-called agreement of mortgage and he was put in possession of the property under the same and subsequently there was an oral agreement of sale in respect of the very property and hence the defendant also filed a counter-claim seeking specific performance of the oral agreement of sale.2. At the trial, neither the agreement of mortgage was produced nor the terms of was the sale spelt out. In that background, the trial court held that the mortgage was non-existent and if the plaintiff s title to the property was not denied and if the suit was brought within the period...
Shri. H.Thomrnayya Bhat, Aged About 57 Years, and ors. Vs. Shri. N.J.R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. This appeal by the claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 15th March 2005, passed in M.V.C.No.440S/2001. by the XI Additional Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-12), (for short, Tribunal' ) for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, 'he compensation of ?3,80,000/-awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for 50.C0 Lakhs, is inadequate.2. The facts IN brief are that, the appellants 1 and 2 are none other than the parents of the deceased Late Dr. H. Tarun Bhat. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that at about 2:30 A.M, on 25-03-2001, the deceased Dr. Tarun Bhat met with an accident near Fire Brigate Station, while he along with other persons was travelling in the Maruthi Car bearing Registration No.KA-19/M-9465, and returning to the Hostel situated in the Campus of J.S.S. Medical College, situate on New Mysore-Bangalore Road on ...
Smt Rukmini Bai Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. These petitions had come up before this court for orders/preliminary hearing on 4-10-2010 along with a batch of like petitions and in terms of a common order as under:Issue interim stay of all further proceedings under the impugned notifications sought for quashing in all these petitions. Two weeks time granted to file statements of objections, if any, if not already filed. Additional statements of objections, if any, are required to be filed on behalf of the respondents. Statements of objections, if any. already filed iii any of the petitions, it is open to them to file such additional statements within two weeks time. Issue of rule and stay is codified to only e Writ Petitions.2. The petition in so far as it relates to first petitioner had been admitted and it is for passing orders in respect of other two petitioners, the matter had been directed to be listed today for further orders.3. Though the matter was called once in the morning session and again in the afternoon sessio...
Sri Manikkam Selvapuram Vs. Secretary. Department of Home, Vidhana Sou ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
ORDER1. This petition came to be registered on a telegram sent by Sri Manikkam received m the High Court complaining that his son Arun has been in illegally detained in Nagamangala Police Station, Mandya District, Karnataka State.2. After notice, respondents have entered appearance and Sri T D Raju, Inspector of Police, Nagamangala Police, Station has filed an affidavit stating that one C M Shankare Gowda lodged, a complaint alleging that one boy spitted on his cloth and diverted his attention, snatched the bag and ran away from there he shouted and public caught hold of the boy and snatched the bag from the boy. He has further stated that a case was registered in Crime No.204/10 for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 511 read with Section 34 of IPC against the said boy and others. As the boy was aged about 15 years, he is a juvenile and it was confirmed by the medical test. He was produced before the Juvenile Court. By an order dated 2.11.2010, the Presiding Officer of the...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors Vs. Kasi. and Arkrigam. and thejes ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-2010
1. These appeals are filed by the Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award passed by the MACT, Bangalore in M V C No.7007/2004 on the following grounds:2. The vehicle in question though insured with the appellant covered with only an Act Policy and therefore inmates of the vehicle are not covered with the risk to compensate on account of their sustaining injury or death. Secondly the driver of the vehicle did not possess valid and effective driving license. Therefore, the appellant is not liable to make good the compensation amount which aspects have not been considered by the claims tribunal.3. When the case called, the respondents remained absent.4. I have gone through the impugned judgment and award and verified the records. Ex.Rl is the policy in respect of vehicle KA05 M 7788 Maruthi Omni with effect from 30.10.2003 to mid night 29.10.2004 and at the relevant column it is mentioned as liability only' which means it is an Act Policy. Therefore, the inmates of the vehicl...
- ‹ Prev
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- Next ›
- Last »