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.P.N. Venugopala Gupta Vs. Smt. C. Saila Kumari and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. Heard the learned council for the appellant2. The appellant was the defendant in a suit for ejectment before the trial Court. The suit was contested by the defendant who raised a plea that the Court did not have jurisdiction as the property let out measured more than fourteen square meters in terms of Section 2(3)...
Sushama Kumar.P. P. Vs. Smt.SheelA.K and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
ORDER1. This petition is filed by the respondent impugning the Judgment and Decree dated 16/5/2009 passed in C. Misc. 322/04 on the file of III Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, wherein the Court below has allowed the petition filed by wife and children of the petitioner herein under Sec. 125 of Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance.2. The brief facts leading to this petition are as under:The petitioner herein is the husband of 1st respondent and 2nd and 3rd respondents are his children. The marriage between petitioner and 1st respondent took place on 18/4/1993. It is not in dispute that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are children and respondent No. 1 is wife of petitioner. The case of the Respondent Nos.l to 3 in C. Misc. 322/04 before the Family Court is that the petitioner herein who is a businessman has neglected and refused to maintain respondent Nos.l to 3. as such they filed C.Misc.322/04 seeking maintenance at the rate of Rs.4.000/- p.m. to the Respondent No.l and Rs.2,000/- p.m. to Respondent No....
Kumari a N Aishwarya Vs. Sri Iakshmana 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. 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 before the Tribunal.4. Brief facts of the case are:That on 7-11-03, when the claimant was going with her parents on Seebinakere - Bettamakki road at Thirthahalli, in front of Eshwara Naika's house, an auto bearing registration No. CTX-6232 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant. As a result, she fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, a claim petition was filed through her father as she was minor, before the MACT, Shimoga. Seeking compensation of 1,79,000/--. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award has awarded compensation of ^.5,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal the claim...
Smt. K.S. Lakshmi and ors Vs. Sri. B.V.Venkatesh and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
COMMON Both these appeals are disposed of by this common judgment.2. M.F.A.NO.607/2008 is by the claimants questioning the grant of interest 30 days from the date of award.3. The appeal filed by the insurer is basically on the question of liability and to some extent quantum also.4. The matter arises in the following manner:5. A petition is filed on 29.11.2004 by the legal heirs of the deceased Suresh seeking compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act against the respondents who are the owners and the insurer of the Auto rickshaw. The claimants 1 to 3 are widow and children of the deceased. The accident occurred on 21.1.2002 when the deceased was driving the Auto rickshaw along with the passengers in Doreswamypalya at Bangalore. While driving the Auto rickshaw he developed sudden chest pain and the Hoysala police took him to Jayanagar General Hospital where ultimately he died. A case has been registered by the J.P.Nagar police station in UDR No.4/2002 under Section 174 of Code o...
David S/O Rebal Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner No.1 to 4 is arrayed as Accused No.2. 4. 1 and 3 respectively in Crime No. 162/2010 registered for offences punishable under Sections 143. 148. 504. 323, 324. 325. 307 r/w 149 I.P.C. They are seeking bail.2. Heard the learned Counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the State and I have been taken through the investigation records.3. As per the investigation records, there were certain loan transactions between the victim Satyanarayana Raikar and Ramadas.4. On 8.9.2010, at about 8.00 a.m., the petitioners along with other accused namely Saleem. Armed with deadly weapons trespassed into the house of victim and mercilessly assaulted the victim and his family members. In the incident, victim had suffered grievous injuries to his head viz.,a) Sutured wound measuring 6cmx in length over the top of the head at frontal and parietal region along the sepital line.b) Sutured wound measuring 3 cms in length over the left side of frontal region of scalp.c) S...
Smt. Nagarathnamma Vs. R Srinivasa Murthy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. The appeal is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 6th October 2004 passed in M.V.C.No. 4249/2002 by the Court of the Small Causes and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bongalora City of Tribunal'. The Tribunal by Its judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs.70,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant has presented this appeal on the ground that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement.2. It is the case of the appellant that on 28.6.2002 at about 2.30 p.m., along with her friend she was going from Nelamangala Village to Hanumenahalli Temple on TVS moped. When they were proceeding on Hindupur Main Road, at Thondebhavi, near Sevananda High School, a lorry bearing Mc.KA07/2Q35 came from opposite direction with high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against TVS moped. Due to this impact, the appellant, who was petition rid...
Sri K Linganna Nayak and ors Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
J.S.KHEHAR, C.J. (Oral) :1. The appellants claim an increment for having qualified the prescribed examination in the Kannada language, on account of the fact, that such benefit has been extended to Government employees It is not a matter of dispute, that the claim of appellants was not considered for the pointed reason, that they were engaged in an institution, which was receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government Having waited for a sufficiently long time, the appellants approached this Court in the year 2003. Pointedly for seeking the aforesaid increment. On the aforesaid occasion, the writ petitions filed by the appellants came to be disposed of by an order dated 22.03.2005. The operative portion of the order dated 22.03.2005 is being extracted hereunder;Writ Petitions are allowed.The impugned endorsement issued vide Annexure-H dated 30.07.2003 in all these petitions, rejecting the request made by the petitioners are set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the claim...
Veerabhadrappa, Vs. V.Maqbool, S/O. Khajar Mohddin
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. This appeal by the appellant is arising out of the impugned judgment and award dated 05/01/2005 passed in MVC No. 117/2002 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and Member, MACT, Doddaballapur (hereinafter referred to as ' Tribunal' for short).2. By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of 71,27.000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization as against the claim made by the appellant for a sum of 713.65.000/-, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident.3. In brief, the facts of the case are: The appellant claims to be aged about 40 years, doing business and earning more than 710,000/- per month. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident. That at about 3.00 p.m., on 22.2.2002 the appellant was talking with one Muddunanjappa by parking their TVS-XL Moped No.KA.04.EB.3898 on footpath near Palanajogihalli plantation cross on Bangalore-Hindupur main road, at that time, Mahindra Jeep bearing Reg.No. AP.9....
Sri. C. S. Narayanaswamy and ors Vs. Sri. B.T Rajarama Reddy and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
1. Though this matter was listed for orders for filing paper books, considering the nature of suit and the judgment and decree, since the point involved being simple. I find that the filing of paper book could be dispensed with. Accordingly, filing of paper book dispensed with. With the consent, appeal is taken up for hearing.2. This is an appeal filed by the defendant Nos.l, 4 and 5 against the judgment and decree dated 9.6.2005 in O.S.No.96/1998 on the file of Prl.Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Kolar.3. Parties will be referred to as per their ranking in the trial court.4. Plaintiff has sought for decree of partition and separate possession in respect of suit schedule property {nteroiia alleging that, one Muniswamappa @ Appajappa was the propositus, who had three sons by name Narasimhappa. Seenappa @ Muneppa and Ramappa. Raniappa died issueless. Seenappa had two sons and three daughters i.e., defendant Nos.l to 5. Narasirr happa .had wife by name Byamma and out of the said wedlock, they had d...
Sri. Gopalappa Vs. Smt. Narayanamma W/O Late Ramachandra and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-2010
ORDER1. Respondents 1 to 6 nave filed O.S.No.2265/2006 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Devanahalli. against the petitioner and others for partition and separate possession of their share in the plaint schedule properties. The petitioner is the 4th defendant in the suit and has filed written statement contesting the claim of the plaintiffs. The other defendants have also filed written statement. Respondents 29 and 30 filed I.A.No.16 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of Code of Civil Procedure to permit them to come on record as 24 and 25, cxmtendine that, the first defendant and the 6th defendant had an. elder sister by name Muniyamma @. Akkayy airmm who is none other than the paternal grandmother of the deponent Srinivas - 2nd applicant and they being no more and their father Shivanna has also passed away, they being Class I heirs are entitled for a share in the suit schedule properties. The petitioner field statement of objections and opposed the claim. The Trial Court being satisfied ...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »