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.
Nagaraju, S/O Narasimhegowda, and ors. Vs. State by Besagara Hally Pol ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. Heard the petitioners' counsel and also the learned Government Pleader for the State in respect of the anticipatory bail sought by the petitioners.2. The petitioners are accused of having committed the offences under Sections 324 and 506 read with 34 of the I.P.C. and following the case registered in Crime No. 87/2010 on the basis of the complaint lodged by one Puttaswamy. The petitioners moved the trial court for anticipatory bail and bail was rejected.3. The prosecution case in short is that, on 31.12.2010, at about 1.00 p.m. the complaint was lodged stating that, on the same day at about 8.30 a.m. while the complainant and others were cutting the trees in their lands, the petitioners came there and assaulted the complainant with pick axe over the right hand and there was fracture and, again with the same weapon, the complainant was assaulted on the shoulder and one Sridhara came and pacified the parties.4. The petitioners' counsel submits that the petitioners arc innocent of the ...
K.Rangappa Son of Late Kariyappa, Vs. B.M.Rangauatha Son of Muddaranga ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. In this appeal filed by the owner of insured vehicle. The following questions would arise for determination:-(1) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that tractor-trailer would constitute a "goods carriage" under section 2(14) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act') and consequently a "transport vehicle" under section 2(47) of the Act?(2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in fastening liability on the appellant/owner of the vehicle since driving license held by the driver of vehicle did not bear specific endorsement entitling him to drive a "transport vehicle' as required under section 3 of the Act.(3) Whether the Tribunal was justified in fastening liability on the appellant when the trailer dashed against claimant was not covered by the policy of insurance?"2. I have heard Sri Chandraiah, learned counsel for appellant and Sri S.Srishaila, learned counsel for Insurance Company. 1 have been taken through evidence, findings of Tribunal and the impugned judgme...
S.R.V. Earth Movers. Vs Kudremukh Iron Ore Co.Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
Petitioner was engaged by the respondent in the work of de-silting of iron ore mine wash (wet) from the Pollution Control Dams 1 and 2 and Bhadra River Bed in the Kudremukh Project Site. However, the disputes arose between the parties subsequently. The same are not settled as on this day. Clause-59 of the General Conditions of Contract contains arbitration clause for settlement of disputes. In spite of exchange of notices, it seems the respondent did not agree for appointment of Arbitrator. Hence, this writ petition is filed praying for appointment of Arbitrator. Respondent's counsel submits that the matter may be referred to the Arbitral Tribunal for the following order is made: adjudication. In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to appoint an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties. Accordingly, Sri N.S.Sangolli, Rptired District Judge, No.415/2, T' Block, Sohakaranagar (Next to Hebbal Ta...
Gopi. S/O Late Krishna Kutti. Vs. State of KarnatakA. by Siddapura Pol ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1.The petitioner who is accused No.3 in the case registered in Cr.No.319/09 and later in Cr.No.324/09 by the Siddapura police in respect of the offences punishable under sections 364, 365- 302. 201 r/w 120-B of the IPC seeks bail following the trial court rejecting bail to him,2. The prosecution case in short is that, one Padma Krishna (deceased) was the wife of one Krishna Kutti and there was property dispute involving the grand son of the aforementioned Krishna Kutti viz., Sunil, the 1st wife's son Manju and 2nd wife's sons Gopi (petitioner), Shabari (accused no.1) and these persons were, asking for the properties from Padma Krishna and it was in this background, that on 8.10.09, when Padma Krishna had left the house to go to the office of the BBMP in connection with change of katha in her name, she was abducted from that place i.e. Corporation Office at Tilanknagar, Bangalore by the accused persons accused nos. 1 to 4 and thereafter the accused took her to the farm house at Huskur w...
T.T.Vasantha Kumar @ Vasantha Kumar S/O B.Thippeswamy. Vs. M/S Durgamb ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. This is claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of judgment and award in M.V.C. No. 1317/2004 dated 31sl January 2007 on the file. Of M.A.C.T.. Chitradurga.2. Claimant was travelling in a bus bearing No KA-20/A-1406. On 29.2.2004. When the bus reached near Shettykere Cross, the driver of the bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the tractor bearing No.KA-15/T-2043-44. As a result of which, claimant suffered right ankle injury movements painful and leis franks fracture with dislocation of right foot. He alleged that, lie spent about Rs.30.000/- towards medical expenditure and claimed compensation of Rs.300, 000/-.3. The claim petition was resisted by the insurer, denying the accident and also the injury and disability.4. Tribunal on the basis of the evidence held that the claimant has proved the accident and has also proved the actionable negligence and further held that he is entitled for compensation.5. Claimant apart from exa...
Raghu @ Raghavendra @ Ramadasa, S/O Dakananaik, and Umesh Naik, S/O Pa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. Heard the petitioners' counsel and the learned Government Pleader for the State in respect of the bail application filed by A-2 and A-3. Who are among the three accused persons against whom a case is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with 34 of the I.P.C. in Crime No. 252/2010.2. The case of the prosecution in short is that deceased Manjunath had given A-l Sathish Rs.25.000/ and the deceased told A-l to snatch the chain and accordingly an attempt was made by A-l to snatch the chain on 10.7.2010 and the public saw the incident and chased the two persons. A-l left the bike at the place and ran away and. thereafter, deceased Manjunath threatened A-1 and he would get A-1 arrested in respect of chain snatching case. This background led to the accused persons deciding to take out the life of Manjunath and accordingly, all the three accused took the deceased near a bush close to the railway compound near Railway Colony at about 8.30 p.m. and later A-2 c...
Puttaswamy S/O KarigowdA. Vs. the Managing Director Ksrtc.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. Show the name of Sri G.Shankar Gond, as appearing for respondent. There is delay of 31 days in filing the appeal. No objections are filed by the respondent. Cause shown is accepted. Delay condoned.2. This is claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of judgment and award in MVC No.739/2005 dated 25.10.2007 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore.3. Claimant and another were travelling in a KSRTC bus on 22.10.2004 to Mysore. On its way the bus met with an accident: as a result of rash and negligent driving of the another bus bearing No.KA.01 F.6484. In the said accident claimant and another sustained grievous injury and they were admitted to the hospital and they were treated. In this regard, claimant claimed compensation of Rs.5.85.000/-.4. The claim petition was opposed by the respondent interalia denying the accident and also the liability. However, the tribunal considering the evidence on record held that the accident is proved also held th...
Sri. G.Shivananda S/O Gavisiddaiah, Vs. Smt. Adilakshmamma W/O Kuppaia ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. This is claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of judgment arid award in M.V.C.No. 7339/2006 dated 4th August 2007 on the file of MACT Bangalore.2. Claimant suffered grievous injury in a road accident that occurred on 1/4/200G while he was travelling on his motor cycle bearing No KA-05-EU/6127. When the said motor cycle reached the place between B.K Doddi and Hoovinakoppalu, a Maruthi Van bearing No.KA-09-M-6325 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle, as a result of which, he suffered grievous Injury and for medical treatment, he spent about 1.80,00/- and claimed compensation of Rs.6 lakhs.3. The said claim petition was opposed by the insurer.4. The Tribunal on the basis of the evidence held that the accident is proved; actionable negligence is proved and also held that the claimant is entitled for compensation. There is no dispute as regard to the liability of the insurer to indemnify the compensation, only question is wheth...
P.V. S/O M.V.Vargice, Vs. the State of KarnatakA. by S.H.O.. Uppinanga ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. Heard the petitioner's counsel and the learned Government Pleader for the State in respect pi the anticipatory bail petition filed.2. The submission of the petitioner's counsel is that, the petitioner is one of the six accused persons against whom a case is registered in respect of the offences under Sections 2. 9, 39. 48A. 50 and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and under Sections 3(1). 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 r/w Section 34 of the I.P.C. and the prosecution case, in short, is that, when the complainant was patrolling on 28.10.2010 at about 3.20a.m. they checked a Qualis vehicle which was coming from Gundy side and found that there were four persons in the vehicle along with five plastic bags containing 5 K.Gs. of wild animal flesh half baked and recovered from them a country single barrel gun and live cartridges.3. Following the arrest of the said four persons, a case was registered even in respect of the present petitioner merely on the basis of the voluntary stat...
Mr. H.J. Ananda Ram, S/O. Late H.V. Janardhanaiah, and anr.Mr. H.J. An ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. Sri. Jagadeesh Mundargi, Govt. Advocate is directed to take notice for Respt. No. 1. Three weeks time is granted for filing memo of appearance.2. In these writ petitions, the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 25.2.2010 passed by the first respondent as per Annexure-'D'. It is not in dispute that respot.No.2 obtained an award against third respondent from the Labour Court in reference No.29/1984 as per Annexure-'A' for re-instatement with back wages, continuity of service and consequential benefits. Ibis award in reference No.29/84 had become final.3. The first respondent filed an application against the third respondent under sec. 34 o'" the Industrial Dispute Act for permission to prosecute. Under the impugned order at Annexure-'D', first respondent permitted the second respondent to prosecute the petitioners herein.4. The grievance of the petitioners is that they are not made as parties in the complaint filed by the second respon...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »