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.
Sharada Recreation Association (Regd), Vs. the State of Karnataka and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. Sri. S. B. Shahapur, learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondents.2. This petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents not to insist upon the petitioner to obtain the license to carry on the lawful activities in the premises of the petitioner's Association either under the Police Act or under the provisions of Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order and not to interfere in the play of games like chess, carom, rummy (card games), and snooker, etc., which are the games of skill.3. The issue is no more res-integra. It is covered by the two decisions of this Court. The order, dated 12th February, 2002 passed in Writ Petition No. 1764 of 2002, reads as follows:"3. I hold that the Petitioner's Association is not required to obtain any license under the Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusements (Bangalore City) Order 1989 for the purpose of running outdoor and indoor games, music and dance, yoga ...
Sri. Jyothula Venkateswara Rao. S/O. Apparao, Vs. the State of Karnata ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. Learned HCGP is directed to take rejoice for Respondents 1 and 2.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP.3. The petitioner has purchased the agricultural lands bearing S.No.21/PI measuring 1 acre 22 guntas. S.No.21/P4 measuring 4 acres and S.No.20/8 measuring 4 acres 4 guntas of Kallugopahalli Village. Ramanagaram Taluk.4. It is thereafter that the Respondent No.2 - Assistant Commissioner initiated the proceedings in LRF (79)/209/2006-07 and passed the order forfeiting the lands referred to supra W.Ps.34312-313/10 on the ground that the petitioner has contravened the provisions contained in Section 79-A and B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. 1961. Aggrieved by the said order, the present petition has been filed.5. As could be seen from the impugned order, it is stated that, initially, a notice was sent by registered post and it returned unserved. Thereafter, it was sent through the Tahsildar and as the petitioner was not in the village, the notice...
Sri.Sadananda Shetty, S/O.Late.Narayana Shetty, Vs. the Tahasildar. Ba ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. Learned AGA is directed to take notice for Respondents 1 and 3.2. Heard the learned counsel '.or the petitioner and also the learned AGA.3. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by Respondent No. 1 - Tahsildar directing the petitioner to hand over the possession of the land bearing S.No.l76/2A 1G1 situate at Kavalamudur Village. Bantwal Taluk.4. The petitioner is the owner in possession of the land bearing No. 11/3F1 referred to .supra measuring 72 cents. After the death of his father, the brothers and sisters of the petitioner said to have released their rights in favour of the petitioner. The name of the petitioner appears in the Record of Rights of the said land. The copy of the same as been produced at Annexure-A. By the side of the land of the petitioner, there is a land bearing S.No.l76/2A 1G1 and the mother of the petitioner had filed an application in Form No.53 under Section 94(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act (hereinafter called as 'the Act' for short) fo...
M/S. Shree Puradamma Recreation Association Vs. the Government of Karn ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-2010
ORDER1. Sri. Narendra Prasad, learned Government Pleader, is directed to take notice for the respondents.2. This petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents not to insist upon the petitioner to obtain the license to carry on the lawful activities in the premises of the petitioner's Association either under the Police Act or under the provisions of Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order and not to interfere in the play of games like rummy, dart, poker, wail coin games, carom, wail ball skill, etc., which are the games of skill.3. The issue is no more res-integra. It is covered by the two decisions of this Court. The order, dated 12Lh February, 2002 passed in Writ Petition No. 1754 of 2002, reads as follows:"3. I hold that the Petitioner's Association is not required to obtain any license under the Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusements (Bangalore City) Order 1989 for the purpose of running outdoor and indoor games, music and dance, y...
Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Ltd. Vs. Mr. Swapan Jaisvml, Proprietor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
1. This appeal is filed by the complainant cy challenging the order dated 24.07.2006, by which, the complaint (C.C.No. 1073/2004) was dismissed for not taking steps against the accused.2. The relevant facts of the case for the disposal of this appeal are that, the appellant who is the complainant, had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, "the Act") read with Section 20C CT.P.C. against the respondent for allegedly committing an offence under Section 138 of the Act. The complaint was presented on 04.11.2003 and on 07.01.2004 the trial court took cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and proceeded to register a ninal case against the accused for the aforesaid offence issued bailable warrant to the accused returnable by 28.06.2004. On that day steps were not taken as according to appellant on account of transfer of Presiding Officer and the matter was posted to 18.10.2004. On 27.09.2004, the complainant filed an appl...
Sri. Sudhakar S/O ShankarappA. Vs. the State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDER1. The first petitioner is the husband of deceased Aruna. The second petitioner is the younger brother of the first petitioner. The marriage of first petitioner with deceased Aruna was performed about 3 years prior to 14.7.2010. It is alleged that the petitioner and his family members including the second petitioner strangulated Aruna to death in the house of petitioners. The petitioners are seeking Anticipatory Bail.2. In a decision reported in AIR 1987 SC 737 in Samunder Singh -vs- State of Rajasthan and others, the Supreme Court has held that:"Criminal P.C. (1974), S.438 Anticipatory Bail - Dowry death - Matter regarding unnatural death of daughter-in-law in her father-in-law's house under investigation - It is not prudent for High Court to grant anticipatory bail - It is not compulsory for High Court to grant anticipatory bail in such matters."3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the postmortem report, cause of death is shown as mechanical asphyxia fr...
V.H.SrinivasA. S/O. Hanumanthaiah. Vs. T.M.Ganeshan. and the United In ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
1. This appeal by the appellants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 22/02/2005 passed in MVC No. 166/2003 by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and Member. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kunigal, (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short).2. The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of 1.42.000/- under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition as against the claim of the appellants for a sum of 5.00.000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Sri. Sreedhara in the road traffic accident.3. In brief, the facts of the case are:The appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased Sri. Sridhara and they have filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation of 5,00,000/-. on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, that occurred on 8.2.2003 at about 3.00 p.m. due to the rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus bearing No.KA. 16.8739 On NH48, B...
Sri.Ravikumar @ Ravikumar S.Raju, S/O Sri.A.S.Narayana Rao, Vs. M/S.Se ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
1. After addressing the arguments and at the intervention of this Court, the parties have settled their dispute amicably. They have filed a joint memo, which is signed by both the parties and their respective advocates.2. The parties have present before the Court. On behalf of the respondent's Company. Sri.Ansari Mazhar Ahmed who has been authorised to sign the compromise petition is present before the Court. The authorization granted is also enclosed along with the joint memo. The parties admit the execution of the compromise petition. They have been identified by the respective Advocates.3. The parties request the Court to reject the relief of specific performance which was sought by the respondent and which has been granted by the trial court and in modification of the judgment and decree of the trial court, the parties request the Court to decree the suit of the respondent for a sum of Rs.30 lakhs which is inclusive of principal, interest and costs, which amount has been calculated...
i L C Industries Ltd. Vs. the Deputy Conservator of Forests
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDERJ.S.KHEHAR, C.J. (Oral):1. The petitioner has moved an application desiring to withdraw the instant writ petition this prayer made at the hands of the petitioner has been opposed by the State Government, by filing a statement of objections.2. During the course of bearing. Learned counsel for the respondents invited our attention to the decision rendered in Shivajirao Nilangekar Patil vs. Dr.Mahesh Madhav Gosaui and others (AIR 1987 SC 294) and drew our pointed attention to the observations recorded in paragraph 36 thereof. Paragraph 36 relied on by the learned counsel for the respondents are being extracted hereunder;The allegations made in the petition disclose a lamentable state of affairs in one of the premier universities of India. The petitioner might have moved in his private interest but enquiry into the conduct of the examiners of the Bombay University in one of the highest medical degrees was a matter of public interest. Such state of affairs having been brought to the no...
Sri Palakshappa Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-2010
ORDER1. In W.P. No.46875-46858/2002 K Chandrappa and another .Vs. State of Karnataka. a Learned Single Judge by order dated 10.4.2003 Annexure 'F' extracting the order passed in earlier writ petition, quashing the order dated 30.3.91 of the Director of the Municipal Administration directing all Municipal Councils to annul the time bound promotions given to its employees who do not possess S.S.L.C. qualification, with further directions setting aside the recovery of the excess amount paid to the petitioners therein, restrained the Municipal Council from giving effect to the orders annulling time bound promotions to its employees and accordingly allowed the writ petition.2. Similar is the facts and circumstances of the case on hand. Petitioner having been extended the benefit of promotion though he had not completed S.S.L.C. qualifying examination is sought to be recalled. Hence the writ petition.3. In the light of the decision referred to supra, petitioner too is entitled to the very sa...
- ‹ Prev
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- Next ›
- Last »