Karnataka Court January 2011 Judgments

Smt. Shashi Karthikeyan, Bangalore and Others Vs. the Tahsildar Bangal ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2011(2)KCCR1428; 2011(4)KantLJ365

(These Petitions are filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, Praying to call for Records from the Respondents pertaining to impugned notice Dtd 23.9.10 and quash the impugned notice Dtd 23.9.10 issued by the Respondent Vide Anex-A to the W.P and Etc…) 1. Writ petitioners as many as fifteen in number, claiming to be purchasers of some sites, very popularly described as `revenue sites’, but which is essentially a revenue land in bits and pieces, from perhaps a common vendor by name Nanjappa and two others with sale transactions as averred in the petitions being during the period from 22.3.1996 upto 5.5.2004, having become very apprehensive of any irreversible adverse action that may be taken against them in the wake of notice bearing No.LNDCR/684/09-10 dated 23.9.10, issued by the Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk, Krishnarajapura, have approached this court seeking the following reliefs: “[a] Call for records from the respondents pertaining to impu...

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Bangalore Rural Division. ...

Court: Karnataka

1. In this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the award dt.2.1.2009 in Ref.No.34/20C5 passed in Labour Court at Bangalore directing reinstatement of respondent, consequential benefits and 50% of back wages.2. Before the Labour Court the petitioner examined two witnesses as MW1 and MW2 and got marked M1 to M.S. The respondent examined himself as WW1 and got marked ExS.W1 to W29. The Labour Court on appreciation of the pleadings, feral and documentary evidence held that the order dt.4 3.1998 passed by the petitioner accepting the resignation of the respondent was not communicated to the responded* and it was only served on 23.5.1998 much earlier to the service of the order dt.4.3.1998. The respondent has withdrawn his resignation on 19.5.1998. In the circumstances, the Labour Court directed reinstatement of the respondent with consequential benefits and 50% back wages. Hence this writ petition.3. Heard arguments on both side and peru...

Smt.H.LalithA. Wife of Sri M.Manjunath. Vs. M/S.Karur Vysya Bank Ltd.

Court: Karnataka

1. Pursuant to the notice issued, learned Counsel Sri Praveen Hegde files vakalath for the respondent-Bank.2. In this writ petition, petitioner is calling hi question the action initiated by the respondent-Bank under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act. 2002 (herein after referred to as the Act').3. The action is initiated against one M/s. S.P. Motors which according to the petitioner is a non-existing concern and had been closed before 23/03/2000 itself. Petitioner asserts that it is carrying on business in the said premises under the name and style Bhairava Bar and Restaurant from 23/03/2000.4. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, as the petitioner is neither a borrower nor a guarantor and is in no way concerned with the respondent-Bank, the bank has no authority in law to initiate the proceedings. It is in this background that the present writ petition is filed seeking a is WP 2225/2011 d...

C N Sathish S/O LingappA. Vs. H C Kalachari S/O Late Channachari, and ...

Court: Karnataka

1. The 3rd defendant in O.S.No.87/2008, aggrieved by the order dated 2.12.2008 of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn). Somwarpet Annexure-"E" allowing plaintiffs l.A.No.2 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC rest raining him from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property, filed MA.No. 19/2008 before the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn). Madikeri. which when dismissed by order dated 19.08.2010 Annexure-"G", has presented this petition.2. The 1st respondent instituted the suit for (i) declaration that he is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of land measuring 3 acres in Sy.No.27/16 New No.27/17. consisting of tiled residential house, cattle shed, drinking water open well and other fixtures and structures attached to earth situated at Yalkanur Hosalli Village, Somwarpet Taluk, Kodagu District, (ii) declaration that the Sale Deed dated 7.6.2008 executed in favour of the petitioner arraigned as 3rd defendant in the suit is invalid and not binding on the plaintiff a...

Smt. Susheelamma W/O Late Muniramaiah. Vs. the Deputy Commissioner Kol ...

Court: Karnataka

1. Writ petitioner claims to be wile of one Muniramaiah who it appears had purchased an extent of 2 acres each in Sy. Ncs.192/1 raid 192/2 having new survey numbers 307 and 311 respectively, from the third respondent Smt. Sarojamma, wife of K Muniyappa under the sale transaction dated 9.6.1988.2. It appeal's the third respondent in turn had purchased the subject land from two other persons in and around the year 1985 who were persons belonging to scheduled caste community and with the subject land having been granted in their favour for cultivation with certain conditions.3. It is in respect of such transaction, the legal heirs of the original grantee had Initiated proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner for invalidating the sale transaction and for restitution of the lands to them.4. The Assistant Commissioner, Kolar Sub-Division, Kolar. held an enquiry in this regard and having noticed that the transactions though were subsequent, to coming into the existence of the provisions ...

G.N. Krishnappa, S/O. Narayanappa, and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka ...

Court: Karnataka

1. This appeal has been tiled by the accused challenging the judgement dated 28.6.05 passed in S.C.No.1 19/02 by the Fast Track Court: II, Shimoga convicting them for offence under Ss.325.341.504.324 r/w 34 IPC and sentencing diem to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for offence under Sec.341 r/w 34 IPC; pay line of Rs.500/- each for offence under Sec.504 r/w 34 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.8OO/-each for the offence under See.324 r/w 34 IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for die offence under Sec. 32 5 r/w 34 IPC with default clause.2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused 1 to 6 on 21.11.01 at about 9 p.m. at RMC yard, Sagar town formed themselves into unlawful assembly with common object of murdering CW-1 in the background of earlier ill-will between CW-1 and A 1 and thereafter holding lethal weapons like clubs and cycle chain assaulted CW-1 stopping him going further and insulted him and criminally intimidated and caused grievous and simp...

Sri Shivakumar. Ravikumar S/O. D Ravi Kumar. Vs. Smt Shobha Shivaramak ...

Court: Karnataka

1. There is a delay of 33 days in filing the appeal. Being satisfied with the cause shown by the appellant, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. MISC.9118/10 is hereby allowed.2. By consent of parties, the appeal is heard on merits.3. The appellant is challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment and decree passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, dt. 11.2.2010 passed in M.C.No. 1904/2005.4. The facts leading to this case are as hereunder: The marriage between the appellant and respondent was solemnized at Bangalore on 6.3.1997. After the marriage, the appellant took the Respondent to U.S.A. where he was working and they lived together in U.S.A. and out of the wedlock, parties are having 2 daughters and they were born on 6.8.2000 and 31.10.2001 respectively. The Respondent - wife filed a petition u/s 13(l)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty.5. According to the wife, the husband used to ill treat her in the presence of...

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sri. Honnagangaiah, S/O. Late ...

Court: Karnataka

1. This appeal is by the insurer challenging the quantum 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 05-08-06, when the deceased Jagadish was travelling as a pillion rider on a motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-06-W-9455 from Dobbspet via Doddaballapura road, near Chikkayellaiahnapalya, the rider of the said motor cycle drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident. As a result, the deceased fell down and sustained head injury and succumbed on the way to Hospital. Hence, his father and second daughter filed a claim petition before the MACT, Bangalore, making the first daughter of the deceased as third respondent, seeking compensation of Rs. 10.30,000/-. The Tribunal by i...

A.Ravikumar Alias Thangavel S/O V.K.Ayyaswamy. Vs. Kavitha Alias Bhuva ...

Court: Karnataka

1. The unsuccessful husband who has failed to get a decree of divorce has filed this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment passed by the Judge. Family Court. Mysore, dated 12.8.2008 in M.C.No.63/2005.2. We have heard the counsel for both the parties.3. The facts of the case are. as here under: The appellant filed a petition for grant of divorce on the ground of desertion and cruelty. According to the petition averments, the marriage was solemnised between the parties on 7.3.1999 at Chennimalai. Tamilnadu. Thereafter, they resided together as husband and wife at Mysore for a short period. The appellant/husband is carrying en the business at Mysore. According to him, the respondent/wife has deserted without any cause and the respondent has treated the appellant/husband with cruelty as she has failed to provide love and affection and has failed to discharge her marital obligation. On these grounds, he filed the petition the respondent/wife contested the case. Acc...

P Malathi W/O Late R Mahesh. Vs. State of Kamataka by Its Prl. Secy. F ...

Court: Karnataka

1.In these petitions, petitioner has prayed for quashing the demand notices dated 19.3.2010- annexures H & J issued by the 5th respondent -Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes demanding to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,613/ and Rs 4,64,220/- towards arrears of sales tax.2. According to the petitioner, she is a licensee in respect of two retail liquor shops at Mandya Town. The original licenses were in the name of B Shivanna and Boregowda. During the life time of the husband of the petitioner, the said licenses were transferred by the Excise authorities by order dated 18.5.2000. At the time the said licenses were transferred in the name of the husband (deceased) of the petitioner, there was no arrears of sale tax from the original licensees. The husband of the petitioner died on 23.4.2008 and acting under R I7A of the Karnataka (Licensing & General Conditions) Rules, both the licenses were transferred in the name of the petitioner and she also obtained the registration certificate under t...