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.
Rakesh Chowdary S/O. Umaram Chowdaiy. Vs. United India Insurance Co. L ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 18th February 2005, passed in M.V.C.No. 5167/2002, by the XIII Additional Small Causes Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-15), (for short. Tribunal' ) for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of H, 15,000/-awarded in his favour as against his claim for 10.00 lakhs, is inadequate.2. The appellant claims to be aged about 13 years, studying IX standard, at the time of accident. He was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That at about 6:15 P.M., on 15-07-2002. the appellant met with an accident while he was proceeding in a TVS 0 Moped along with his friend, near Balaji Petrol Bunk, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Tata sumo bearing No.DL-6/CA-3403. As a result of the same, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Bagepalli, where first-aid treatment was ...
Smt.S.K.Bhavana, Vs. M/S. United India Insurance Company Limited,
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. The matter is listed for admission. With the consent of reamed Counsel for parties, it is taken up for 1 final disposal. -2. The owner of the insured vehicle has filed this appeal to modify the award by saddling liability on the Insurance Company inter alia contending that as on the date of accident, the vehicle involved in the accident was insured with M/s.United India Insurance Company Limited. The appellant had not contested the claim petition before the tribunal. Trie claimant has not produced the particulars of Insurance Policy. Therefore, the tribunal exonerated the Insurance Company of its liability to saddle liability on the owner (appellant 2 herein). On 25.8.2009, this Court directed the appellant to furnish the particulars of the vehicle involved in the accident and Sri P.B.Raju, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company was directed to verify with, theInsurance Company with particular reference to Engine number and Chassis number3. When the matter is taken up for hearing...
Puttaningamma and ors Vs. Thippeswarny and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. This is plaintiffs appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28.10.2004 in O.S. No.53/1996 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chitradurga.2. For convenience, the parties will be referred to as per their ranking in the trial court.3. The plaintiffs sought for declaration that, the sale transaction dated 04.01.1982, is not binding on them. Consequently, to declare that, they are the owners in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and for permanent injunction against defendant nos. 1 and 2 and their men and agents. Alternatively, they also claim that plaintiffs nos.2 to 4 are entitled for 1/4 share each in the suit schedule property by making partition and separate possession out of their suit schedule property.4. Plain till No 1 k the wife of defendant no. 3, plaintiff nos.2 & 4 are the children of plaintiff no.1 and defendant No.3. Defendant nos.1 and 2 are brothers.5. The case of the plaintiffs is that, the third defendant's father by name...
Smt. Meenakshamma Vs. Sri S. Prasannappa Son of Late K.Subbappa and or ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. The appellant was originally the defendant in a suit for partition and separate possession. The suit was filed by her mother, who was the plaintiff, seeking a share in coparceners property. The mother, having died during the pendency of the suit, the present appellant who was the defendant No.2. Sought the permission of the Court to transpose herself as the plaintiff and agitated the suit. The suit was dismissed.2. In an appeal before the lower appellate court, it was established that in so far as the suit schedule 'C properties were concerned; the defendants could not establish that it was the subject matter of any partition. However, in so far as schedule 'A' and schedule 'B' properties were concerned, there was material to indicate that it was the subject matter of mortgage and thereafter, a sale deed and relinquishment deed were executed, in order to discharge the expenses towards the marriage of defendant No.3 and to discharge family debts. Further, in so far schedule 'B' prope...
Smt.Prema Samani, Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
ORDER1. The 4th respondent had availed financial assistance from respondent No. 3 for his agricultural purposes. It is the case of the 3rd respondent that Janardhan Samani, husband of the petitioner (son of the 4,h respondent) and respondent No.5 were the guarantors for the said loan transaction. Since respondent No. 4 failed to pay the said amount, respondent No.3 initiated proceedings before the 2n...
A Elango. S/O. Sonalamala Vs. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation.2. Heard. The appeal is admitted and with the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties it is taken up for final disposal.3. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition.4. Brief facts of the case are: That on 28.09.2006 when the claimant was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02J3A-6508 on NH 3, CMTI signal junction, Yeshwanthpur a tempo bearing registration No. KA-08-1417 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his motorcycle, as a result the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Hence he filed a claim petition before MACT. Bangalore seeking compensation of 7.3,25,000/- and the Tribunal has awarded compensation of 7.1.99.000/- with interest at 6% p.a. on 7.1,89,000/- from the date of claim petition till its realization.5. The claimant has sustained fracture of right humorous. Injury sustained by him is evident f...
Eilias Mas/O Abraham Vs. Ramananda Holla S/O Late K.N. Holla and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. This appeal is by the claimant for enhancement, of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal,3. The brief facts of the case: On 02.10.2005, when the claimant proceeding as a pillion rider in a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-19-L-5564 from Surathkal side towards Mangalore, near Kodical cross of NH-17, the SRKT bus bearing registration No. KA-19-B-20I1 came from Mangalore towards Udupi in a rash and negligent manner dashed agates their motorcycle. As a result, the claimant fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition before the MACT, Mangalore seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. The Tribunal awarded him a global compensation of Rs.35,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.4. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of accident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only point that arises for my consideration ...
Sri H B Ramakrishnaiah Vs. the Commissioner. Bangalore Development Aut ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel Sri. Shivakumar for the 1st respondent BDA and Sri. Jagadeesh Mundargi for the 2nd respondent. None appears for the petitioner and despite waiting for some time even after completion of the arguments by the respondents counsel. There was no indication of petitioners counsel appearing before this court. Under the said circumstances, no other option was left than to proceed with the matter.2. At the outset, learned counsel Sri. Shivakumar for the BDA submitted that the relief sought, by the petitioner involves going to the factual aspect of the matter, in as much as though the petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus to the 1st respondent BDA to execute the absolute sale deed in respect of the property/site bearing No.22-A situated at West of Chord Road, 1 Block. 3rd Stage. Rajajinagar measuring East to West 17 4 25 feet/2 feet North to South 60 test, a perusal of the documents filed by both sides and the stand taken in the objections by the BDA would go...
Sri P R Srinivasalu Vs. Sri P R Sathish Babu and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
ORDER1. Plaintiff has filed this writ petition questioning an order dated 22.12.09 passed by the Trial Court whereby, it has allowed I.A.5 and directed him to furnish the list of moveable and immoveable properties of M/s.Shruthi Enterprises and M/s.Viginesh Enterprises and directed to furnish the accounts of the said concerns.2. Ind'sputably, M/s.Vighnesh Enterprises is a concern standing in the name of the plaintiff's wife who is not a party to the suit. Taking the said circumstance into account, this Court while ordering notice of the writ petition, has held as follows:The order in so far as it directs the plaintiff to furnish accounts of the concern - Shruthi Enterprises is concerned,, need not be interfered with as no case is made out so far as this portion of the order is concerned. However, as regards the direction issued to Sn. Vigneshwara Enterpirses, which is in the name of Smt. Nagaveni, wife of the plaintiff requires consideration."3. Sri T. Seshagiri Pac, learned counsel ap...
The Director of Income Tax Vs. Sri. Prahlad Vijendra Rao
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. This is revenue appeal questioning the correctness and legality of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No 1137/ BNG/ 2008 dated 26.06.2009.2. Assesses is an individual and for the Assessment Year 2005-06 return of income was filed under the status of "Non-resident" declaring total income of Rs.85,230/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) which resulted in refund order being issued. Subsequently it was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) came to be issued and in response to the said notice issued. assesses appeared and furnished the details of his stay in India during the previous years which according to the assesses was 140 days. Since assesses contended that he is a nonresident fresh notice was issued and after considering the reply submitted by the assesses, Assessing Officer came to a conclusion that amount received by way of salary by the assesses in a sum of Rs. 10,00,131/- was income deemed to have been received in India as ...
- ‹ Prev
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- Next ›
- Last »