Karnataka Court February 2011 Judgments

The Divisional Manager Vs. Prakash and Another

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

(Prayer: This Misc First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of M.V. Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated: 14.06.2010, passed in M.V.C.No.544/2006, on the file of the Addl. Senior Civil Judge and AMACT, Ranebennur, Awarding the compensation of Rs.2,06,896/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation.) 1. Appeal by the insurance company under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the Act), to wriggle out of the joint liability in terms of the order and award dated 14-6-2010 passed in MVC No 544 of 2006, on the file of Addl Civil Judge and AMACT, Ranebennur, on the most frivolous and cantankerous ground of the person who was driving the vehicle – an autocab – permitted to carry three passengers in addition to the driver, was not duly licenced to drive that vehicle, though such person did hold a valid licence to drive a “transport vehicle” as endorsed on the very licence. 2. It is for making ...

M/S. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., by Its Divisional Manager, Represent ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

(This Appeal is filed U/s. 173(1) of MV Act 1988 against the Judgment and Award dated 20.07.2007 passed in MVC No.520/2006 on the file of the member, Addl. Mact and presiding Officer, fast track court-II, Koppal, awarding compensation of Rs.23,000/- along with interest of at the rate of 6% P.A., from the date of petition till its deposit.) The present appeals reveal the careless and negligent manner of functioning of the appellant M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Bellary Branch, who has preferred these appeals questioning the legality of the order and award passed by the Member, Addl. M.A.C.T. and P.O, Fast track Court-II, Koppal in M.V.C. No.520/2006 and M.V.C. No.521/2006 dated 20.07.2007 awarding a compensation in a sum of Rs.23,000/- and Rs.20,000/- respectively in favour of first respondent in both the appeals, contending that the Insurance Company even when had no liability to pay any amount, particularly as the first respondent in M.F.A.No.13506/2007 was an unauthorized ...

Nagashetty Vs. Basawaraj

Court: Karnataka Gulbarga

(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 12.03.2010 passed by II Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Gulbarga in E.P.No.302/2008 at Annexure-D consequently allow this writ petition and etc.) 1. By the impugned order the Executing Court has held that the Execution Petition is maintainable. 2. The petitioner herein is a mortgagee and the respondent is a mortgager. The respondent herein had mortgaged the property by virtue of the mortgage deed dated 22.03.1993, which was registered for `15,000/-. The same is an usufructory mortgage for a period of 5 years. After 5 years, the possession was not re-delivered. Hence the respondent herein filed a suit in O.S.No.285/2004 for redemption of mortgage, which came to be decreed on 27.11.2007. The same was confirmed in R.A.No.155/2007 on 21.06.2008. The same has attained finality. Thereafter the decree holder filed E.P.No.302/2008 for getting the decree executed. From that d...

Y.S. Krishnamma and Another Vs. State of Karnataka Department of Reven ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: These writ petitions are filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of India prayed to direct the 4th respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 3.10.2009 vide annexure-A in accordance with law and in particular to make out Khata in favour of petitioners in respect of land in Sy.No.165. Measuring 3 acres 15 Guntas. Gokara village. Devanahalli Taluk. Bangalore Rural District. Declare respondent as having become Non-Est in law. As Annexure-B respectively.)1. To be, or not to be, - that is the dilemma with which Hamlet the prince of Denmark was confronted when he had to make up his mind as to whether to act on the information that he received from the ghost of his father the King of Denmark informing that the King had been murdered by his brother not only to annihilate the King but also to annex the queen herself and therefore, it was his duty to seek revenge and to set right things by ending the life of his uncle, the then King of Denmark or to ...

Abubakar S/O. Ali Kunchi. Vs. Government of Karnataka, by Principal Se ...

Court: Karnataka

1. The petitioner in this case is the brother of the detenu - Abdul Khadar Kunhali Palsthadka. By order dated 16.09.2010 in HD 16 SCF 2010 by the second respondent, the detenu is retained in detention.2. According to the petitioner, the detention order is erroneous and illegal, as the same is without application of mind on the part of the second respondent. The detaining authority is entitled to exercise powers to pass such detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act. 1974 (in short COFEPOSA Act) if he is satisfied that the materials placed before him require such detention, but in the present case there is no application of mind in passing the said order. The very words used in the order referred to below would indicate that there is no application of mind, i.e. "with a view to preventing the detenu from acting in any manner from smuggling of Indian Currency Notes". In the absence of such grounds, the said order is beyond the p...

A.G. Vijay Kumar Vs. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., and Another

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2011(2)KCCR1584

K. Govindarajulu, J: 1. Short point that is urged by the appellant in this appeal is in regard to disallowing a sum of Rs.10.000/- by the learned member of the Tribunal. 2. The accident is not disputed. It is only the quantum of compensation awarded is disputed. According to the survey report, the damage is to the tune of Rs. 65,108.32. According to the invoices. It is Rs. 77,805/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 70.000/-. 3. Learned advocates for the Insurance Company submits that Court should not encourage parties to move the Court in such small claims. 4. The Motor Vehicles Act creates a statutory duty on Insurance Company to insure, corollary of it is that party who insures get a right. Further MV Act is considered as a social welfare legislation, so person who has lost should get reimbursed. So, Court should not encourage small claims is rejected. 5. Sri K. Suresh, learned Advocate for the Insurance Company further contend that the claimant cannot claim the old damages. Thi...

Mrs. Jayashree Vani Vs. Bank of India

Court: Karnataka

(This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to call for the entire records leading to the orders dated 5.10.2010 and 27.11.2010 and to quash the order dated 5.10.2010 (under Annexure-K to the writ petition) and order dated 27.11.2010 (under Annexure-P to he writ petition) both passed by the Disciplinary Authority, direct the respondent/Bank by issue of a mandamus to pay to the petitioner arrears of subsistence allowance on the basis of full salary and allowances after one year from the date of suspension i.e. with effect from 5.4.2005 till date and permit the petitioner to engage the services of a lawyer to defend her as defence representative in the pending departmental inquiry.) Petitioner joined the services of respondent-Bank as a Clerk on 12.8.1984. She was posed to work as Chief Cashier at the Bangalore Main Branch of the bank on 29.1.2004. However, in the month of April 2004, it was found that there was shortage of cash to the tun...

Sathyanarayana and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Principal ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: These Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India Praying to quash the notices issued by the 4th Respondent dated 20.10.2010 produced As Annexures-X, X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6 to the Writ Petition and Etc.,) 1. Writ petitioners seven in number claim that they have interest in properties which have been assigned Municipal Katha Nos.483 (Old No.620), 473 (Old No.680/621), 2373 (Old No.622), 631 (623/686), 688/324, Old Katha No.59 Old AR Nos.625 and 689, respectively, located within the limits of Hassan City, Hassan Municipal Council, Devigree Circle. 2. It is the version of the petitioners that they acquired right, title and interest in these properties after having participated in an auction sale conducted by the then Hassan City Municipality in the year 1965-1966 and having been successful bidders and having paid the commensurate amount and claim that such transaction is evidenced by sale certificates issued by the 5th respondent. The Commissioner,...

Allam Karibasappa, Bellary and Others Vs. Singamasetty Venkataramaiah ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: MFA No.2873/2004 is filed U/S 75(2) of Provincial Insolveny Act, R/W SEC. 104 of CPC against the Order DT. 16.2.04 Passed on I.A. NO.XV IN I.C. NO.2/75 on the file of the AddL. dist, Judge, Bellary, dismissing I.A.NO.XV FILED U/S. 4 and 5 of the Act, Seeking relief of issuance of suitable directions to the official receiver, Bellary. MFA No. 2706/2004 is filed U/S. 75 of Provincial Insolvency Act, against the Order DT. 16.2.04 Passed on I.A.NO.XV IN I.C .NO.2/75 on the file of the Addl. Dist. Judge, Bellary, dismissing I.A.NO.XV FILE DU/S s.4 and 5 of the ac tin IC. Seeking relief of issuance of suitable directions to the official receiver, Bellary.) These two appeals arise out of the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Bellary, dated 16.02.2004 passed on I.A. XV in I.C. No.2/75 and Ms. C. No.5/2000, wherein the learned District Judge has allowed the application filed under Sections 144 and 94 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in Ms. C. No.5/2000 ...

M/S. Bharti Airtel Ltd., Rep by Its Head-legal and Regulatory, S. Naga ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: These Writ Appeals filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in the Writ Petition No.21876-87/2010 dated 07.01.2011.) 1. In all these appeals, the question raised relates to the competence of the State to levy Sales Tax/VAT on telecommunication service, interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions and upholding the rule of law. Therefore, they are taken up for consideration together and disposed off by this common order. 2. For the purpose of clarity, the facts pleaded by appellants/petitioners in each of these cases are set out in brief. FACTUAL MATRIX W.A.Nos.654/2011, 817-828/2011, 789/2011, 790/2011, 805-816/2011, 792-803/2011, 791/2011 and 829-840/2011. 3. The appellant in all these appeals – M/s. Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited (for short herein after referred to as the ‘BSNL’) is wholly owned Government of India undertaking providing all types of telecom services in the country except the met...