Karnataka Court January 2011 Judgments

Karnataka State Financial Corporation Represented by Its Branch Manage ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under article 226 and 227 of Constitution of India. It is prayed that this Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to 1) issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order of the Hon’ble Court below dated 18.4.2006 on I.A.No.1 filed by the petitioner under 0.XXXVIII Rules 5 of C.P.C. in Misc. Petition No.10/2004 vide Annexure-E and order dated 1.2.2007 on the I.A.No.V, filed by the Petitioner under 0.XXXIX R.1 and 2 in Misc. Petition No.10/2004 vide Annexure-G, and to further allow the said applications. 2) Grant such other relief’s as are deemed fit and necessary under the circumstances of the case including the cost of this writ petition.) 1. This writ petition is by the Karnataka State Financial Corporation (hereinafter it is referred to as Corporation for the sake of brevity) seeking quashing of the orders dated 18.04.2006 passed on I.A.Nos.2 and 5 respectively in Miscellaneous Petition No.10/2004 by the District and ...

N. Balakrishna Naidu, Bangalore Vs. the Special Deputy Commissioner, B ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2011(2)KantLJ177; 2011ILR(Kar)2136

(Prayer: This Petition is filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for the entire records on the file of the R1 and R2 and quash the order dt.28.8.09, passed by the R1, in Revision Petition no.16/05-06 vide Ann-G and etc.,) (Prayer: Misc.w. 12468 of 2009 is filed Under Chapter X of the High Court of Karnataka rules, 1959, praying to vacate the stay order granted vide Interim order dated 15.09.2009 of this Hon’ble court, in the interest of justice and equity.) IN WP NO.27903 OF 2009: 1. Writ petitioners are nobody to question the revenue entries whether as it prevailed prior to the impugned order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner exercising his jurisdiction under section 136[3] of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, impugned in this writ petition [copy at Annexure-G] or pursuant to the order etc., as the subject entries are required to be mutated in the revenue records reflecting the interest of persons in whose favour the Judgment a...

The Commissioner, Bangalofre Development Authority Versus K. Shiva Kum ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2011(3)KantLJ359; 2011(3)KCCR2026(DB)

V.G. Sabhahit, J. This appeal is filed by the Bangalore Development Authority (hereinafter called as ‘BDA’ for brevity)-respondent 1 in W.P. No. 37897 of 2009 being aggrieved by the order dated 4-6-2010, wherein the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and directed the BDA-appellant herein to refund sale consideration of Rs. 1,19,70,000/- and also sum of Rs. 10,17,450/- deposited by the petitioner-respondent herein for value of the stamp paper with interest at 18% p.a. from 10-7-2007 till the date of refund and rejected the prayer of the writ petitioner for damages with liberty to file suit in that behalf. 2. The respondent herein filed W.P. No.37897 of 2009 seeking for refund of auction sale consideration deposited by him and also the amount deposited by him towards the stamp duty and damages of Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of deposit till the date of refund. 3. It is the case of the respondent herein that he had purchased a corner s...

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Regional Office Re ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2011(1)KCCR728; 2011ILR(Kar)2256; 2012(1)LLN241; 2012(1)KantLJ200

(Prayer: This Appeal is filed under Section 30(1) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, against the Judgment and Award dated 25/7/2007 passed in WCA/NF/SR-60/2006 on the file of the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Hassan Sub-Division, Hassan, awarding compensation of Rs. 4,13,826/- with interest at 12% p.a.) 1. Second respondent in WCA/NF/SR-60/2006 on the file of Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation. Hassan Sub-Division, Hassan, has come up in this appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded to claimant. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are as under: The case of claimant before the commissioner is that he was working as Loader under first respondent in Lorry bearing No.KA-03/C-5319. On 18/2/2006 in the course of his employment under first respondent, he suffered injuries arising out of his employment resulting in amputation of left palm with all the five fingers. He filed Claim Petition before the Commissioner seeking compe...

Sri V Gajendra, S/O G Venkatesh, Vs State of Karnataka by Thavarkere R ...

Court: Karnataka

1. Heard petitioners counsel and also learned Addl. S.P.P for the State in respect of bail sought by this petitioner who is now made A-2 in the case which is now pending in S.C.No. 118/07 for the offences punishable under sections 376. 324. 342. 506 of the IPC.2. Submission of the petitioner's counsel is that, this petitioner was not the accused at the earlier stage, but only during the course of evidence, when PW-4 was examined, it was revealed that it was this petitioner who is said to have committed the alleged offences and consequently A-2 who was the person in the earlier stage has been released on bail. But now this petitioner is facing trial as A-2 along with his father.3. Submission of the learned Addl. S.P.P for the State is that this petitioner has been identified by the witness PW-4 as the person who had committed the alleged offences and having regard to the above submission made and trial being in progress and as many as four witnesses have been examined, grant of bail at ...

Sri Jagadish @ Jaga, S/O Hanumantharayaipa, Vs. the State of Karnataka ...

Court: Karnataka

1. The petitioner is said to be accused no.2 in the case registered by the Madiwala police in Cr.No. 1330/10 for the offence punishable able under section 366 A of the IPC.2. Submission of the petitioner's counsel is that, this petitioner is not involved in the act of abduction of the complainant's daughter and therefore bail be granted to him.3. Submission of the learned Addl. S.P.P for the respondent-State is that, the investigation is still going on and this petitioner is required for the purpose of identification by the girl in question and as such, grant of bail at this stage is likely to affect the prosecution case and chances of the victim girl being threatened also cannot be ruled out.4. Having thus heard both sides and the prosecution case in short being that, on 19.1 1.2010 accused no.1 Manu took away the girl Anitha, complainant's daughter in die vehicle along with this petitioner and went to Sringeri and thereafter the girl managed to come back to her parents house. In view...

Shivanna S/O MaskallappA. Vs. Gayathri Devi W/O M.K.Pakameshwara Rao.

Court: Karnataka

1. This is claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard Sri Krishnoji Rao, learned counsel for the claimant and Sri R.Rajagopalan, learned counsel for the insurance company.3. As per medical records and evidence of PW2-Dr.Prabnu Basavanagowda, claimant had suffered the following injuries:i) Laceration of about 4x2 cm.ii) Abrasion over right parietal region, abrasion of about 2x1 cm., abrasion over dorsal aspect of left hand;iii) Fracture of lower l/3rd right femur, compound communited fracture of upper 1/3rd tibia floating knee.4. At the first instance, claimant was treated in Govt. Hospital, Hiriyur and then shifted to Victoria Hospital at Bangalore and finally to MVJ Medical College and Research Hospital, Bangalore. The fractures were reduced by open reduction and internal fixations. The photographs of claimant marked as Exs.P14 to P20 would show that right lower limb is in a deformed state. Even after completion treatment, claimant suffers from following disabil...

M Manjunatha @ Manjappa S/O MariyappA. Vs. Dr Mohan Kumar S/O Late D R ...

Court: Karnataka

1. This is claimant's appeal to set aside the order of dismissal of the claim petition and award just compensation.2. I have heard Sri Shashidhara, learned counsel for the claimant and Sri O.Mahesh, learned counsel for the insurance company.3. As per the averments of claim petition that on 14.2 2006 at 5.00 a.m. claimant was travelling in a Maruti van bearing registration No. KA- 16-A 761 from Holalkere to Holalkere railway station, a lorry bearing registration no.KA-01-5943 came at high speed from the opposite direction and dashed against the van in which the claimant was travelling. He suffered injuries and he was admitted to Navodaya Hospital at Davanagere. The claimant had suffered fractures of both bones of the right leg.4. The Respondents contested claim petition and denied claimant was travelling in Maruti van and he was injured in the accident. According to respondents, claimant had fabricated documents to claim compensation from the insurance company.5. The Tribunal noticing t...

Sri.M.Chezhiyan, S/O Sri.Muthuswamy. Vs. Karnataka State Transport Aut ...

Court: Karnataka

1. Petitioner herein has sought for to issue writ of certiorari to quash the order at Annexure C passed by the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal dated 30.1.2010 passed in Appeal No.2269/2007 and for such other reliefs2. According to the petitioner, the 1SI respondent-KSTA has granted variation of the permit condition from K.G.F. to Gandlapalii, as prayed for by the petitioner after conducting joint survey extending the route by another 23.6kms i.e., 9.7kms within the State of Andhra Pradesh and 13.9kms in the State of Karnataka and the terminals being within the State of Karnataka. However, the said permission of variation granted by KSTA has been struck down by the Tribunal on the appeal that, there is no agreement entered into and variation granted is in violation of Section 80(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act and it exceeds 24kms and it has been extended without any inter State agreement and also no counter signature is obtained.3. Heard.4. According to the petitioner's couns...

Vivek @ Appu S/O Balasundar. Vs State of Karnataka by Arakalgudu P.S.

Court: Karnataka

1. Heard both sides in respect of the bail petition filed by accused No. 7 who is among the other accused persons in respect of whom a case is registered in Cr.No. 175/08 for the offence punishable under section 395 of IPC.2. Submission of the petitioner's counsel is that, on 25.5.09 the accused persons 1 to 5 caught he'd of the complainant and took away from him ATM card, money purse and other articles at knife point and thereafter the vehicle in which the accused were travelling was taken to the garage of this petitioner. Submitting that A-7 is not involved in the alleged act of dacoits, petitioner's counsel seeks bail, and name of the petitioner is also not found in the FIR is the further submission made.3. Learned Addl. S.P.P for the respondent-State on the other hand submitted that this petitioner is involved in many ether eases and mobile was recovered from him.4. Having thus heard both sides as above and submission of the petitioner's counsel being that the petitioner has been a...