Karnataka Court January 2011 Judgments
Shivagangamma M C W/O Late Doddagowda, and ors. Vs. State of KarnatakA ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Respondent No.3 is stated to have executed a sale deed dated 13.10.2000, transferring land measuring 23'x40'. The claim of the petitioners herein was, that the land in question had been earmarked for the purpose of a park, and such, could not have been sold by respondent No.3 to respondent No.4.2. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for respondent Mo.4 handed over to us five photographs, which are collectively taken on record and marked as Annexure-X. Based on Annexure-X, it is the vehement contention of the learned counsel representing respondent No.4, that the land in question is being used exclusively as a park-cum-playground for children, and as such, no violation can be deemed to have been committed in the matter of transfer of the land in question, at the hands of respondent. No.3 to respondent No.4. Additionally, respondent Nos.3 and 4 contend, that the aforesaid land shall continue to be used as park-cum playground hereinafter, without any deviation whatsoever.3. A...
Tag this Judgment!H. R.Hemalath a W/O Late Lokanathachar, and ors. Vs. R.Ramesh, and anr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Even though the appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of both the counsel, appeal is taken up for final disposal.2. Appeal is by the claimants. The claimants are none other than the widow of the deceased and two p, minor children and the mother. The case of the claimants is that the deceased was running a power loom and his income was 15,000/-p.m. He met with an accident on 25.12.2003. succumbed to injuries on 26.12.2003. Hence, a claim petition was lodged seeking compensation.3. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs.3.000/ pan. and has determined the compensation under the heading of loss of dependency as 3.84.000/- and Rs.45,000/- in respect of other conventional heads including medical expenses. The total compensation awarded is 4.29.000/-.4. Smt.Ashadevi, learned counsel appearing for the claimants submits that the Tribunal was not justified in taking the income of the deceased at ^.3.000/-p.m., more so, having regard to the number of dependants. She...
Tag this Judgment!Sri T Sudarshan. S/O Dr Thimmeggwda, and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Heard both sides in respect of anticipatory bail petitions Piled against accused persons A-1 to A-3 following the case being registered in Cr.No.253/10 for the offences punishable under sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Prize Chit & Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 and section 420 of IPC.2. .Submission of learned counsel Sri. Sheshagiri Rao for AT and A-2 is that, the petitioners were not involved in running any chit business, but on the oilier hand, the petitioners were involved in selling mobile phones and laptops and moreover, no complaint of any cheating has been lodged by any of the persons and in the absence of any complaint forthcoming against the petitioners in respect of they being cheated in the prize money transaction and this court having granted bail to A-4 and A-5 earlier. these petitioners also be released on bail by imposing conditions.3. Submission of Sri. Rajakumar C. Diwakar for A-3 is also the same as above.4. Learned Addl. S.P.P for the respondent -State d...
Tag this Judgment!Sri K Ramachandrapa, S/O Late KadavarappA. Vs. State of KarnatakA. by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Heard both sides in respect of bail sought by the petitioner who is said to be A- i in the ease registered in Cr.No. 1/11 for the offences punishable under sections 7, 13(l)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1988.2. The case against the accused person in short is that, the complainant approached the petitioner, who at the relevant time was working as Joint Director in the Department of Employment and Training and the complainant approached the petitioner in connection with salary grant accorded by the Government to the employees of the ITT which was run by the complainant and in this connection, the petitioner is said to have demanded Rs.1.0 lakhs as illegal gratification and out of that. Rs.2 lakhs was received by the petitioner about two months prior to the complaint and balance of Rs.8 lakhs was received through A-2 and A-2 was trapped by the Lokayuktha police on the information given by the complainant.3. Petitioner's counsel submits that, no recovery was made fr...
Tag this Judgment!Mysore Lamp Works Ltd. Vs. Mysore Urban Development Authority.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment and decree passed by the Small Causes & Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Mysore dated 2.8.2007 in O.S.No.751/200 4 the appellant-company is a public sector undertaking of State of Karnataka. Respondent-Mysore Urban Development Authority is also a creation of the State of Karnataka under the Karnataka Urban Development Authority Act,1937.2. Facts leading to this case are as hereunder: Mysore Urban Development Authority filed the suit to recover a sum of Rs.1,03,00,000/- which is said to have been paid as advance for the supply of electrical materials and erection of street lights etc. to the defendant and a sum of Rs.36,87,682/- towards interest to be calculated from 24.11.2001 to 17.11.2004 on Rs.1,03,00,000/-with interest at 12% p.a. along with notice charges of Rs.1,000/-, in all Rs.1,39,88,682/-According to the plaint averments, in respect of two residential lay-outs formed by the plaintiff-Myso...
Tag this Judgment!Smt Soumya, W/O Late Govinda Bhat, and anr. Vs. the State of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Heard learned counsel Sri. Syed Khaleel Pasha for the petitioner in CrLP.No.6193/ 10 learned senior counsel Sri. R.B.Naik for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.344/11 arid also Sri. P.M. Nawaz, learned Addl. S.P.P for the respondent-State.2. The prosecution case in short is that, the deceased being the wife of A-2 (petitioner in Crl.P.No.6193/10) was residing along with A-.1 in a rented house at Whitefield, Bangalore and A-1 telephoned to A-2, wife of deceased, saying that the deceased had fallen down in the house in the bathroom and thereafter an UDR case was registered and later on, it was revealed that the dead body had 16 injuries over it and after post mortem and after sending some material objects to FSL, report was received and it was to the effect that the injuries that were found on the dead body can be due to impact with a hard blunt surface injury and injuries were also noticed on the top and sides of head and those injuries were unlikely to be caused due to fall on a hard rough...
Tag this Judgment!G.Chandramohan S/O Govinda Reddy. Vs. the Managing Director B.M.T.C. a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard Smt. Leela. learned counsel for claimant and Sri D.Vijayakumar. learned counsel for Insurance Company.3. As a result of injuries, claimant had suffered following injuries:-I. Contusive head InjuryII. Fracture of nasal boneIII. Fracture of lateral and medial wall of right maxillary s:nusIV. Dentoalveolar fracture of upper right anterior dento alveolar segment and post, displacement.V. Abrasion below knee, both hands and feet the claimant was treated in Mallya Hospital at Bangalore. The fractures were conservatively treated. 4. At the time of accident, claimant was aged about 22 years and he was studying in V semester B.E. (Computer Science). Though PW2-Dr.Sunil Kumar has assessed permanent physical disability, nature of injuries and avocation of claimant would not justify the assessment of functional disability.5. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1.03.290/- under following heads:-I. Pain & sufferi...
Tag this Judgment!N Murali S/O Late K Narasimhaiah. Vs. State of Karnataka - by Its Prl. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Petitioner is assailing the order at annexure A issued by 'he It respondent published on 28.2.2009 and has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash the same.2. The petitioner who is a CL2 license holder carrying on trade in liquor, is questioning the propriety of the notification issued on 28.2.2009 by way of a government order published in the Gazette - Part I, by which according to the petitioner, sudden decision has been taken in the middle of the Excise Year to reduce the profit margin from 20% to 10%. This reduction of the profit margin is termed as arbitrary and without the authority of law. Also, according to the petitioner, the interim notification is without prior indication and without affording opportunity to the petitioner and similarly placed persons as such, is in violation of Art. 19 l(g) of the Constitution.3. It is contended, the policies and notifications are issued much prior to the commencement of the new excise year. But, all of a sudden, this notification came ...
Tag this Judgment!The Divisional Controller Ksrtc. Vs. Sri B.DhanapalakshA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a with in the nature of certiorari to quash the award dated H. 12.2009 in I.D.No.78/2005 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Hubli.2. Respondent is an employee of the petitioner Corporation. On 20.6.2001 respondent was transferred and on the same day he was relieved and further he was directed to report for duty at transferred place immediately. Accordingly, on 21.6.2001 respondent reported for duty. Since no breathing time was given, respondent could not hand over the charge and consequently, he reported the same to the concerned authorities as per Ex.W3. Despite this, articles of charges were issued enquiry was held and an order penalty of reducing the basic pay by two incremental stages permanently was passed. Aggrieved by this order of penalty, the respondent raised a dispute before the Tribunal under Section 10(1 )(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') . On the basis of pleadings, the Labour Court framed...
Tag this Judgment!Smt.VasanthA. W/O Late Dwarakanath. Vs. the State of Karnataka, by Its ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. In this petition, petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari quashing the impugned notification at Annexure A dated 28.02 2009 issued by the Is1 respondent and published in the Karnataka Gazette dt.28.02.2009 in part-1.2. Petitioner is the holder of CL-9 license for the Excise Year 2008-2009 for running a Bar and Restaurant i.e., selling liquor (other than arrack) and also serving food. According to her, as per the earlier notification dated 29.06.2006, 20% profit margin was given to them, which has been reduced to 10% by applying the subsequent notification dated 28.02.2009 as per Annexure 'A" published in the official gazette, as a result of which, she suffered a loss for a period of tour months. According to the petitioner, the Government has suomoto issued the notification at Annexure 'A' dated 28.02.2009 reducing the profit margin to 10% from 20% without consulting the distilleries, which is illegal.3. Heard4. The learned Advocate General, on the instruction of th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »