Karnataka Court August 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.
Smt.Kasthuri Rajugouda Path W/O Rajugouda Path Aged About 40 Years. Vs ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking leave of the Court to withdraw this petition. It reads as follows;-'The counsel for the petitioner prays that this Hon tie Court may kindly be pleased to dismiss the above writ petition as withdrawn, keeping liberty to approach the appropriate Court, in the interest of Justice."'2. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn, reserving the sought liberties to the petitioner,...
Siddegowda Since dead bv his LR's,Smt. Chikkainma, Wife Aged about 75 ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.Learned counsel for the complainants acknowledges that as of now no adverse action has been taken against the complainant which could be considered as a disobedience of the order dated 20.11,2000 passed by this Court. In view of the above, learned counsel for the complainants states that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant contempt petition. Dismissed as withdrawn,...
M/S. Print 7c Partnership . Vs. Sri, Palani Velu the Authorised Office ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.Learned counsel for the complainant alleges disobedience of the order dated 10.2.2010 (document no.4) on the basis of a communication dated 14.7.2010 addressed by the Chief Manager & Authorised Officer of the Syndicate Bank to the complainant. It is submitted that the proposed action therein is in clear violation of the interim order dated 10.2.2010 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Kamataka.2.Having heard the learned counsel for the complainant, we are of the opinion that the complainant has prematurely approached this Court as against the contemplated action depicted in the communication dated 14.7.2010. It would be just and appropriate for the complainant to forward the certified copy of the interim order dated 10.2.2010 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Karnataka to the city manager and the authorised officer of the syndicate bank With the aforesaid observations, we dispose of instant contempt petition.Dismissed as withdrwan...
Sri Mohammad Inayathulla S/O. Smt. Peerambi Aged About 46 Years. Vs. t ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.The order dt. 29/6/2000, Annex.S, of the Union of India, is called in question in this petition filed on 12/4/2010. In view of the inordinate delay and latches, petition deserves to be rejected and is accordingly rejected....
P Nagaraj S/O Late Chikkapapaiah. Aged 66 Years, and ors.Vs. the Deput ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.Heard.The petitioners have filed this application for amendment of the writ petitions. Misc.W.7586/10 is accordingly allowed. Petitioners are permitted to amend the writ petitions....
P.Vatsalamma, W/O Pratap Simha P.R., Aged About 55 Years, Vs. M/S. Ori ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.Learned Counsel for the petitioner has filed a Memo seeking withdrawal of the Revision Petitions.2. In view of the Memo filed, Revision Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn....
Sri. P. Srinivasa Reddy S/O Sri.Pilla Reddy.Vs. State of Karaataka, by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.There is a delay of 1392 days in Sing the revision petition,2.In the affidavit filed by the petitioner, it is stated that he came to know the disposal of appeal in the last week of December, 2009 and he learnt that his Counsel is not practicing in the Court at Bangalore and though he made best effort, he was unable to contact his Counsel. He has else stated that, he was unable to locate the present address of the said Counsel. It is further alleged that the Advocate before the appellate Court not only he did not appear before the Court, but has not informed the status of the appeal and only when his Counsel in the Magistrate Court informed that the appeal is dismissed, he came to know about the same.3. It is stated that the teamed Counsel who filed an appeal in the appellate Court is not practicing andhis present address is also not known. It is only on the lack of proper communications the petitioner could net file this revision petition in time.4.Though the circumstances do no...
Sri Bhawarlal Aged About 48 Years, S/O Late Sri Modaji Proprietor, Vs. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
1.Heard learned counsel for the parties finally in respect of the appeal preferred by the plaintiff in the trial court calling in question the concurrent findings of the courts below.2.The suit filed by the appellant for declaration and permanent injunction came to be rejected by the trial court and the lower appellate court confirmed the same by dismissing the plaintiffs appeal. 3.Brief facts are that the suit was filed by the appellant for the aforesaid relief of declaration and injunction on the footing that she being the tenant of the respondent and the rent also being enhanced periodically, following the eviction order obtained by the respondent in H.R.C.No.253/94, the appellant therefore sought the relief of declaration from the trial court that the eviction order in the aforesaid HRC proceedings is not binding on her and for an order of permanent injunction restraining the respondent from dispossessing the plaintiff.4. The respondent-defendant contested the said suit by taking u...
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation. Vs. the Deputy Labour Comm ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.Petitioner - Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, aggrieved by the order dated 10.05.2005 Annexure-'A" of the 2nd respondent - Controlling Authority and 27.02.2006 Annexure-"C" of the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act. 1972, has preferred this petition.2. Facts are that the 3rd respondent served the petitioner - Corporation for a period of 26 years 3 months with a break in service of 2 years and 6 months totalling to 29 years and having retired from service on 10.05.1995, though paid the gratuity, did not question the same within time, but did so only on 12.01.2001. after six years. Before the Controlling Authority, the petitioner when arraigned as respondent and served with notice, did not file statement of objections whence the Controlling Authority, on the basis of the material on record, reckoning, the admitted last drawn basic pay of Rs.2,090/- and adding D.A. of Rs.2,424/- totalling to Rs.4.514/- applied multiplier 26 being the number of years of...
The Managing Director, Ksrtc. Vs. Sri Radhakrishna, S/O Late Ramanna G ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
ORDER1.Heard. Interim stay of the impugned judgment and award in MVC No.1312/2008 dated 18.5.2010 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. D.K., Mangalore. Misc.Cvl.No. 12141/2010 stands allowed accordingly....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »