Karnataka Court December 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.
The Hutti Gold Mines Company Limited Vs. H.G.M.L. Copper Units Officer ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-2011
1. Though all the appeals are filed assailing the order sated 1-3-2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.Nos.14293 and 14294 of 1996 (S), the appeals in W.A.Nos.1004 and 1497 of 2001 are filed by the petitioners in the writ petition, who would hereinafter be referred to as ‘Employees’ for the purpose of convenience and clarity. The appeals in W.A.Nos.5783 and 5784 of 2001 are filed by the second respondent in the writ petition, who would hereinafter be referred to as ‘Employer’. 2. In a petition where the ‘Employees’ had prayed for parity in pay scales, the learned Single Judge though granted the relief, the same is with effect from 1-4-1996. The ‘Employees’ are in appeal praying that the same be granted from the year 1985. On the other hand the ‘Employer’ is assailing the order of the learned Single Judge in its entirety as according to them the ‘Employees’ are not entitled to the relief in the present fac...
Adhaya Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore Vs. State of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-2011
1. The petitioner was allotted an industrial plot by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (‘Board’ for short) measuring 6508 sq.mtrs. at Bommasandra-Jigani Industrial Area, Anekal as per the letter of allotment at Annexure-A1, dated 10-1-2005. The petitioner was put in possession of the said site as per the possession certificate at Annexure-A2, dated 28-12-2005. The lease-cum-sale deed was also executed by the Board as per Annexure-B, dated 16-2-2006 in favour of the petitioner. The sketch showing the plot in question was attached to the said lease-cum-sale deed. The Chief Executive Officer/Executive Member of the Board has issued a notice at Annexure-F, dated 21-7-2008 informing the petitioner that the area allotted to the petitioner in the aforesaid plot is restricted to 5970 sq.mtrs. He was directed to surrender the original possession certificate dated 28-2-2005 and to obtain revised possession certificate for 5970 sq.mtrs. of land by contacting Development ...
Y.R. Manohar Vs. the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore City, Bangalore ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-2011
1. In this writ petition, petitioner is seeking a direction against the respondent-Police to allow the petitioner to carry on the business in conformity with the provisions of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 and the relevant Rules framed there under and in terms of the conditions imposed in the licence granted in Form CL-9. A direction is also sought against the respondents not to interfere with the smooth running of the business of the petitioner. 2. The essential grievance made in the writ petition is that despite the law laid down by this Court in W.P. No. 3743 of 2008 connected with W.P. No. 9345 of 2008 disposed of on 24-9-2008 holding that Rule 9 of the Karnataka Excise (Sale of an Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968 and Sub-section (2) of Section 20 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 were unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 15, 16, 21 and 39 of the Constitution of India and therefore not enforceable, respondent-Police have been interfering with the petitioner from...
Kum N. Jyothi Vs. Peer Sab and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-2011
(Prayer: This MFA is filed U/S.173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and Award dated 15/6/2006 passed in MVC No. 26/02 on the file of the Addl. District Judge and MACT, Chickmagalur, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.) 1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 15.6.2006 passed in MVC No.26/2002 on the file of the Addl. District Judge and MACT, Chikmagalur (for short, ‘Tribunal’). The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award, awarded compensation of Rs. 1,70,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation, on account of injuries sustained by the claimant in road traffic accident, on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is adequate and requires enhancement. 2. The brief facts of the case are that: the claimant was aged about 20 years and was prosecuting her studies. She was hale and healthy prior to th...
The Secretary, Karnataka Educational and Cultural Society (Regd.), Eng ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-2011
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. 2. The brief facts are as follows:- The petitioner is a registered society which has established and manages a school known as English Nursery, Primary and High School and Samskritha Pathashala in Bangalore. The respondent who was employed as a nursery teacher in the Nursery School run by the petitioner-Management against a leave vacancy of one Smt. Leelavathi Bai for the period upto March 1985 or till such time Smt. Leelavathi Bai reported for duty. The respondent was reappointed by an order dated 7-6-1986 on temporary basis. She was also appointed as a part-time Clerk in the Nursery School by an order dated 3-10-1992. She was offered a letter of appointment as a part-time Clerk in the Nursery School by a further letter dated 30-7-1994. This was on account of the fact that one section of the Nursery School was closed down on account of want of student strength. The respondent was later transferred to the Nursery Scho...
Smt. Chandramathi and Others Vs. Dayananda and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-2011
1. The claimants in MVC No. 285 of 2007 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sakleshpura have come up in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded therein. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are, claimants are widow, son and daughter of deceased Renuk, who died in a motor accident, which took place on 23-6-2006 at about 7 p.m., near Devarajappa’s land Magalur Circle at Magalur Village. The accident is not in dispute. The ownership of vehicle by 1st respondent and relationship of insured and insurer between 1st and 2nd respondents is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that widow, son and daughter of deceased Renuk immediately after the death of Renuk in the aforesaid accident filed claim petition seeking compensation. They state that deceased Renuk was an agriculturist, tailor and was also doing milk vending and as earning monthly income of Rs. 18,000/-. Due to his death in the aforesaid accident, claimants have lost the bread-winner of the family...
The Commissioner Mysore City Corporation Represented by Its Commission ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-2011
This WP Filed Praying To Call For The Records In Reference No.122/04, From The Industrial Tribunal, Mysore Dist, Mysore And Quash The Order Dt.30.1.09 In Ference 122/04 On The File Of The Industrial Tribunal, Mysore Dist, Mysore As Per Ann-D; And Etc. 1. The Mysore City Corporation aggrieved by the award dated 30th Jan. 2009 in Ref. No.122/2004 of the Industrial Tribunal, Mysore, directing regularization of the services of respondents 4 to 26 w.e.f. 2.11.2006 has presented this petition. 2. The 3rd respondent Employees Association espoused the cause of respondents 4 to 26 for regularisation of their service on the premise that though appointed by the petitioner Corporation were denied regularization, by initiating conciliation proceeding under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the I.D.Act’). The conciliation having ended in a failure report led to the Government Order dated 9.11.2004 referring the points of dispute for adjudication to the industrial Tribunal, My...
Venkateshappa Vs. Venkatesappa and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-2011
1. This appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiff is directed against the concurrent judgment and order passed by the Courts below dismissing the suit filed by him for the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction. 2. The subject-matter of the suit is land bearing Survey No. 181 measuring 2 acres situated in Sugatur Village of Kolar Taluk. 3. The case of the appellant/plaintiff in brief was that, the suit schedule property was granted to one Muniga, son of Thimma of Sigtur Village, under Dharkasth by the reveunue authorities on 3-6-1942 and since then, the said Muniga was in possession and cultivation of the suit scheduled property as its absolute owner, that subsequently, the said Muniga sold the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff’s father under a registered sale deed dated 4-1-1971 and placed the plaintiff’s father in possession of the same; that since then the plaintiff’s father was in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›