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.
Davangere Urban Development Authority Vs. Comrade LenIn Vidya Samsthe
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
ORDERJ.S.KHEHAR, C.J. (Oral);1. Through the instant writ appeal, the appellant i.e , the Davangere Urban Development Authority has assailed the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 12-06-2009 by which Writ Petition No.3237/2007 was disposed of. While disposing of the aforesaid writ petition, a writ in the nature of mandamus was issued requiring the Davanagere Urban Development Authority to comply with the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.6690/1997, within two months.2. in sum and substance, it is not in dispute between the learned counsel for either parties, that the issue which is subject matter for consideration in the instant writ appeal is, whether the civic amenities site allotted to the respondent on 2.8.1984 should be treated as on "lease", or by way of "sale".3. Some facts relevant to the controversy need to be recorded. Based on the allotment of a civic amenity site to the respondent on 2.8.1984. the Davangere Urban Development Authority executed...
Mr Syed Saifulla S/0 Late Syed Ismail Vs. Mrs Suriya Banu @ Salma Banu ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
ORDER1. This revision under section 19(6) of the Family Court Act is directed against the order dated 11.09.2009 in C.M:sc.l64/2004 on the file of the I Addl.Prl.Judge, Family Court, Bangalore granting maintenance to the respondents i.e., at the rate of Rs.3,000/-p.m. to the first respondent and Rs. 1,000/- each to the respondents 2 and notice to respondents.The petition is posted for admission after3. Heard. The petition is admitted and taken for final disposal by consent.4. Not in dispute is the fact that the petitioner and respondent No.1 are husband and wife tiea with e nuptial knot according to the Muslim rights. The marriage was consummated and respondents 2 and 3 are their genetic children. The first respondent filed a petition under sec 125 of Cr.Pc seeking maintenance in a sum of Rs.7,000/- p.m. alleging that the petitioner herein married her without disclosing the fact that he was already a married and had children from his first wife. However, after the marriage, she had adj...
Smt. Hanumamma @ Hanumanthamma W/O. HanumanthappA. Vs. Mohammed Beig. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
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 21-3-06, when the claimant was going by-walk on N.H.206 near Vijayalakshmi Talkies in Kadur town, a lorry bearing registration No.CAS-2750 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against her. As a result, she sustained injuries. Hence, she filed a claim petition oeibre the MACT, Kadur. Seeking compensation of 5.00.000/-. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award has awarded compensation of 35,110/- with interest at 6% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal the claimant is in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.5. As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of acc...
Mr. R. Vijayendra Babu Vs. K. Narayana Regional Rovident Fund Commsiss ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
1. This Writ appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P. Wo.3174/2010, being aggrieved by the condition imposed by the learned single Judge while granting the interim order dated 06.02.2010, asking the petitioner - appellant herein to deposit 50% of the demand within two weeks from 06.02.2010.2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.3. The appellant herein filed Writ Petition No.3174/2010 seeking for quashing of the order dated 18.01.2010 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II, Mysore, as per Annexure ' F' to the writ petition, issuing the Warrant of Arrest against the petitioner-appellant herein as he had not discharged the liability of payment of provident fund dues. The learned single Judge granted interim order subject to the condition that the writ petitioner shall deposit 50% of the demand within two weeks from 06.02.2010. Being aggrieved by the said order, in so far as it relates to imposing of condition to deposit 50% of the demand, which is i...
The Managing Director. Nwkrtc Central Office. and ors Vs. KrishnappA. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
1. These two Appeals, one filed by KSRTC and another filed by the claimant are directed against one and the same judgment dated 8.5.2003 made in MVC No.994/2001 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.)/Addl. MACT at Chitradurga.2. The appellant in MFA No.6555/2003 viz. Road Transport Corporation has contended that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry and the driver of the bus was not responsible for the accident. It is further contended that the Tribunal has awarded exorbitant compensation in favour of the claimant along with high rate of interest at 9% per annum.3. The appellant/claimant in MFA No. 1868/2004 has sought for enhancement of compensation contending that the Tribunal has not awarded adequate compensation.4. Since these two Appeals are directed against one and the same judgment. I proceed to dispose off the Appeals by common judgment.5. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the Appeals may be stated as under: it is the case of the...
B. T. Eshwarappa S/O Thimma Naik Vs. the Mysore Paper Mills Limited
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
ORDER1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for issue of writ to quash the official memorandum dated 10.10.2006 which is impugned at Annexure-K.2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the petition papers.3. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the writ petition in the manner done here below is alone noticed at this juncture.The petitioner was working in the respondent/The Mysore Paper Mills Ltd in CT-1 grade in the finishing department of the paper mills. Subsequently when he was to be appointed in the sugar mills which is a different unit as Weigh-bridge Assistant in Grade MS-4, the petitioner opted for the same pursuant to which the interview notice dated 20.04.2006 which is at Annexure-A was issued. While opting to appear for the interview and take the appointment in MS-4 Grade in the sugar mills, the petitioner had sought for protection of pay which he was drawing as CT-1 Grade in the finishing department. Subsequent to such appoint...
Smt M S Latha W/O D R Laxmikantha Vs. Sri D R Laxmikanth S/O Late D R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
T1. ORDERS ON MFA 9001/2008The appellant and her counsel had filed a memo stating that the appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties in MFA No.9002/2008. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.ORDERS ON MFA 9002/2008. The parties have filed a joint memo. It is signed by the respective advocates. Appellant No.1. and respondent are present before the court. Appellant No. 1 has signed the joint memo for and on behalf of her minor children who are the Appellants 2 and 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that this compromise arrived at between the parties is in the interest of the minors. The parties have been identified by their respective advocates. The parties admit the compromise petition.2. The joint memo reads that the respondent has to pay arrears of Rs.58,000/- which he has agreed to pay within 3 months from today, failing which, the appellants are entitled to realize the same by executing the order of the court...
Karisasamma @ Basamma and ors Vs. G. Gurmurthy and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
ORDER1. Respondents/plaintiffs have instituted O.S.281/2007 against the petitioners/defendants for partition and separate possession. The suit has been contested by filing written statement. I.A.3 was filed by defendants seeking an order of temporary injunction against the plaintiffs. Noticing that, there is an order of temporary injunction issued against the defendants restraining them from alienating the plaint schedule property during the pendency of the suit, the Trial Court dismissed I.A 3. Aggrieved, the defendants filed M.A.59/2009 in the Court below. The Court below without even summoning the records of the suit or calling upon the parties to file certified copies of the record of the suit has dismissed the appeal. This writ petition is directed against the said order.2. Head the learned counsel on both sides and perused the writ petition record.3. Undisputedly, the Trial of the suit has commenced and the plaintiff has adduced evidence. The Trial of the suit can proceed.4. Howe...
Krishna Bai W/O Late B G Chandre Gowda and ors Vs. G B Loke Gowda S/O ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
1. The appellants wore plaintiffs in O.S.NO.99/1997 on the file of Civil Judge, (Sr.Dn.), Chikmagalur. They are challenging the Judgment and decree of the court below dt. 2.12.2004 on2y on the ground that though the Trial Court, considered theft share properly in paragraph-29 of the Judgment, the Trial Court has committed an error in excluding the property sold by defendant-1 and father of defendants-2 to 4 in favour of defendants-7 and 8 In order to get a clarification, the present appeal is filed.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.3. The plaintiffs filed the suit for partition and separate possession of their share by metes and bounds in all the plaint schedule properties. According to the plaint averments, one Byregowda had 5 sons by name, G.B.Lokegowda- defendant-1, G.B. Bomme gowdr father of defendants-2 to 4, G.B. Gopala Gowda husband and father of defendants 5 and 6 and G.B.Chandre gowda, husband and father of the plaintiffs-1 to 3, later the defendants-5 and 6...
C.N.Balavardhana S/O Nanjaiah and Smt D.Jayamma Vs. Sacked Heart Credi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
1. These-writ appeals are filed by challenging the order of the learned single judge dated I.2.20i0 passed in W.P.No. 14662/2009 by the first and second petitioners in the writ petition. The write petition insofar as it related to the third petitioner was allowed. The appellants herein who were the Is' & 2,Kl petitioners in the writ petition had challenged the award dated 29.12.2003 passed by the second respondent in ART. No.210/2003-04 and the judgment of the" Karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bangalore (hereinafter, referred to as 'KAT) dated 28.1.2009 passed in Appeal No. 1003/2006.2. The petitioners are borrowers of loan from the first respondent-society and since they became defaulters, the first respondent herein raised a dispute before the second respondent claiming Rs. 10.98.793/-. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners were served with the notice and date of hearing was fixed as 8.9.2003 and later the case was posted to 20.10.2003 on which date the second respond...
- ‹ Prev
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- Next ›
- Last »