Karnataka Court January 2011 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.
Sri Jayaramaiah S/O Late YellappA. Vs. State of Karnataka Rep. by Its ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. Writ petitioner claims 10 be a person who is armed with an ex parte Judgment and decree against the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District. Bangalore, State of Karnataka - by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Vidhana Soudna, Bangalore, in respect of an extent of 4 acres of land in Sy. No.41 of Konappana Agrahara Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, as per Judgment and decree dated 12.12.2001 passed in OS No.464 of 2001 on the file of the Court of Addl. II Civil Judge [Jr. Dn.], Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore.2. Submission of Sri. Shivanna, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the State, in fact, had filed an appeal against this Judgment and decree under which the petitioner's title to the suit had been declared and a permanent restraint order passed against the defendants by filing RA No.35 of 2003 before the Principal Civil Judge appeal also came to be dismissed for non-prosecution on 9.7.2006: that in this state of affairs, the Judgment and decre...
The Chief Law Officer(K.S.R.T.C). Vs. Sri. V.A. Narasimha Reddy. S/O A ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. Sri. Jagadeesh Mundargi. Govt. Advocate is directed to take notice for Respt.No.2 and 3. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dt. 11.3.2009 passed by the Controlling Authority and the order dt.30.12.2009 passed by the Appellate Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act directing the petitioners 10 pay differences in gratuity amount of Rs. 1.22.678/- with interest at 10% p.a. W.E.F. 1.11.1996.2. The respondent retired from service of the petitioners' Corporation on 30.9.1996. At the time of retirement the petitioners paid gratuity amount of Rs. 1, 64.106/- The respondent being not satisfied with the payment of gratuity amount, filed an application before the Controlling Authority on 18.1.1997 claiming difference in gratuity amount. Under the impugned order at Annexure-A, the Controlling authority directed the petitioner to pay difference in gratuity amount together with interest. Aggrieved by this order of controllin...
Annappaswamy S/O Rajanna @ BoregovvdA. Vs. BalakrishnA.V S/O C.Velu, a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. There is delay of 84 days in filing the appeal. Though contesting respondent is served and represented, no objections are filed. Cause shown is accepted. Delay condoned.2. This is claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of judgment arid award in MVC No. 1892/2007 dated 7.2.2008 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Bangalore.3. Claimant suffered grievous injury in a road accident on 3.9.2006. In this regard, he claimed compensation of Rs. 11.80.000/-, however, the tribunal on consideration of the evidence, has awarded compensation of Rs.3.28.400/-. Being unsatisfied with the said award, claimant is in appeal.4. Liability of the respondent is not in dispute, and no appeal is filed by the respondent.5 From the evidence it is clear that, the claimant has suffered fracture of deep laceration over the middle of left leg, pain and swelling on left knee, pain and swelling on left. hand. X-ray. of left leg shows that the claimant has sustained comminuted fr...
The Divisional Manager the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt Gangaha ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. This appeal is by the insurer of the offending vehicle for reduction of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Heard, the appeal is admitted and with the .consent of the .teamed counsel appearing for the parties, it is waken up for final disposal.3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.4. The brief facts of the case: On 01.12.2006, when the deceased Mayappa. @ Mayanna was proceeding as a pillion rider in motorcycle from Boiamaranahalli towards Nelamangaia, a Tata Mobile bearing registration No.KA- 43-637 came from behind m a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. As a result, the claimant, sustained grievous injuries and immediately was shifted to Government Hospital, Nelamangala. and from there to NIMHANS, Bangalore and then shifted- to J.P.Kospilal and again shifted to Spandana Nursing home, where he succumbed to injuries. Hence, his wife and two major sons filed a claim pe...
Sri .T. S. Narayana Kumar S/O T.N.ShyamasundarA. Vs. M/S.The Oriental ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement 01 compensation.2. I have heard Smt.Srividva. learned counsel for claimant and Sri.C.Shankar Reddy. learned counsel for insurance company.3. It is established from the medical records and medical evidence that claimant had suffered fracture of right ulna and segmented fracture of right tibia and fibula. The claimant was treated in HOSMAT hospital from 4.3.2008 to 10.3.2008. He underwent operation for reduction of fractures. Thereafter, he attended different hospitals for follow up treatment.4. As per evidence of PW.2 Dr.P.Niranjana Murthy, claimant suffers from following permanent physical disabilities:1) Restricted movements of right, lower limb and right upper limb2) Unable to bear weight on right leg3) Mild limping gait in right leg with surgical scar.4) Shortening of right leg by 3 cm5) Restricted movements of right knee joint and right ankle joint6) Mal-union of segmental fractures of tibia with mal-united fracture of fibula.7) Surgic...
C, Veeramaathi GowdA. Vs. Sri.K.Madhu S/O K.Y.Shetty, and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. There is a delay of 61 days in. filing die appeal. Though contesting respondents are served andin are Sled. Cause shown is accepted. Delay condoned I.A.No.1/2008 for condonation of delay is allowed.2. Respondent No.5 is another Insurance Company. However liability is not fixed on the Respondent No.5. Respondent No.3 Insurance Company has satisfied the compensation. Hence Notice to respondent No,5 is dispensed with.3. This is a claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of the Judgment and Award dated 03.04.2008 in M.V.C 25/ 2003 on the file of Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Shimoga.4. This is a claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the injury suffered in a road accident on 16.06.2002. Claimant sustained cum-united fracture of upper 1/3rd of right Tibia and Fibula, He was inpatient from 21.08.2002 to 12-09.2002. He was treated for 7 times and finally he has been seen by the Doctor on l0.08.2007. The Doctor has assessed 27% disability to the rig...
M/S. T T P Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Regional Provident Commissio ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the demand notice dated 28.10.2009 as per Annexure E issued by respondent No. 2.2. An establishment called M/s. Aldea Electronics Private Limited (for short the establishment) was covered under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the P.F. Act'). This establishment borrowed loan from the Karnataka State Financial Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') through its branch at Tumkur by pledging the movables and immovables. This establishment subsequently committed default in payment of the loan amount. Consequently the secured creditor - Corporation had taken over the assets of the establishment by exercising its- power under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act. There after the secured creditor brought the machinery, land and building of the establishment for sale through public auction. One M/s Skanda/ Venkataramana G...
Sri L Purushottama S/O Late Lakshminarayana Bhat. Vs. Sri S Ganesh Heg ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. Plaintiff in O.S.818/09 aggrieved by the order date 15/2/2019 of the VIII Addl. City Civil Judge. Bangalore framing an additional issue casting the burden on the plaintiff to establish his title to the suit schedule property and directing valuation of the plaint under Sec.26 (a) of the Karnataka Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act. 1958, for short Act has presented this petition.2. Indisputably the suit instituted by the petitioner is for permanent injunction restraining the defendant/respondent herein from interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Nowhere in the plaint averments, had the plaintiff alleged that had the defendant denied plaintiffs title to the property. In that view of the matter, the valuation of the suit for the purpose of court fees was in accordance with Sec.26 (c) of the Act. Section 26(a) of the Act would have application only if the plaintiff alleged in the plaint that his title to the immovable property whi...
Sri Venkateshwara Transport and ors. Vs. the Principal Secretary to th ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. In W.P.No.4417/2010, the petitioner is challenging the order of the 3rd respondent dated 22.2.2007 and the Gazette Notification issued by the State of Karnataka dated 26.3 1998 and for such other rebels.2. In W.P. Nos. 1690 98/2009, the petitioner is challenging the order of the Tribunal passed in R.P. Nos. 196 to 204/07 dated 31. 10.2008 vide Annexure-D and the Gazette Notification dated 20.3.1998 issued by the State of Andhra Pradesh vide Annexure-A and for such other reliefs.3. Ir. W.P. Nos. 1771 1-17720/2008, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 31.10.2008 passed by the Tribunal m R.P.No.634/07. Appeal Nos. 1339/07, 1222-29/07 vide Annexure-J and the Gazette Notification dated 20.3.1998 issued by the State of Andhra Pradesh and for such other reliefs.4. In W.P.No.4417/2010, petitioner is said to be an operator of stage services based in Andhra Pradesh, holding transferee stage carriage permit No.8/1967 for the route Kadapa to Bangalore and permit No.6/68(B) granted by t...
international Justice Mission. Vs. State of KarnatakA. Rep by Sub-insp ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2011
1. Heard petitioner's counsel and also learned Government Pleader for the 1st respondent-State in respect of the petitioner calling in question the order passed by the trial court, accepting the 'B' report.2. Submission of the petitioners counsel is that, the petitioner which is a social organization had filed a protest petition before the trial court following 'B' report submitted by the police and the background facts are that the Tahsildar of Kunigal lodged a complaint with the P.S.I, Kunigal to the effect that accused Nos. 1 to 4 of Hutridurga village were extracting work from Chinnaraju, Kamalamma and their three children and one Madesha, Eramma and their two children and one Nagarathna and Rajagopal as bonded labourers and therefore action was sought to be taken against the accused persons. The said complaint by the Tahsildar was preceded by a report submitted by the Asst. Commissioner to the Tahsildar. The police however, after investigation, submitted a 'B' report and this was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- Next ›
- Last »