Karnataka Court February 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.
T.Sreerangamma W/O Late B.Jayanna, and ors. Vs. Sujeeth Jagadeesh Pras ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. This is a claimants' appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard Sri. Patel D.Karegovvda. learned counsel for claimants and Sri.B.A.Ramakrishna. learned counsel for insurance company.3. The claimant No. 1 is I he wile and claimants No.2 and 3 are the minor sons of deceased B.Jayanna who died in a motor vehicle accident, occurred on 27.11.2005. The deceased Jayanna was working as a Fireman in Fire Brigade at Hosadurga. He was a permanent Employee of Karnataka State Government (Home Department).4. The claimants have produced the copy of SSLG marks card of the deceased to show that deceased was born on 19.07.1902. As on the date of accident, the deceased was aged about 43 years 4 mouths 8 days. He was getting monthly salary of Rs.6.347/- and he was paying Professional Tax of Rs.60/-. The Tribunal has taken the take home salary of decreased to determine the loss of dependency. The Tribunal has adopted '13' multiplier instead of adopting '14' multiplier.5.In the case of Sarla ...
Sri T Devananda Balaji S/O A. Jagannath. Vs. Sri Jagannatha Babu. S/O ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. Sri K. Pradhan, Advocate is appointed as amicus curiae for the petitioner.2. Heard.3. Facts necessary for consideration of the present revision are as follows: Complainant has filed a private complaint numbered as PGR No. 181/99 complaining an offence under Section 138 of the NI Act. Case of the complainant is that the accused has issued a cheque for Rs. 1, 00, 000/- bearing No.562711 drawn on UCO Bank dated 30.9.99. It was given by the accused for consideration which accused is liable to pay. The said cheque was presented for encashment. It returned with an endorsement 'insufficient funds. Thereafter, notice was issued and a complaint under Section 200 Cr.PC is filed for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, ('NT Act' for short). The presence of the accused is secured by the learned Addl. JMFC, Chickmagalur. Evidence is recorded. PW 1 is examined and exhibits P-1 to P-6 are marked. Accused is examined but no documents are marked on behalf of th...
Mr.Jeevan.L. Salian S/O Laxman ThingalayA. Vs. Mr.Mahesh Shetty S/O Pa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard Sri.H.Pavanachandra Shetty, learned counsel for claimant and Sri. C.K. Ravishankar. learned counsel for insurance company.3. As per wound certificate produced by claimant, he had suffered haematoma over thoracic spine, fracture of. T6 vertebra and fracture of 5th metacarpal bone of right hand. The claimant was treated in Hi tech Medicare Hospital and Research Centre at Udupi. The claimant has not examined the Doctor to prove nature of treatment, duration of treatment and permanent physical disability. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.50.200/- under following heads:I Pain and sufferingsRs.25,000II ConveyanceRs. 1.000III Attendant and nourishing foodRs. 2.000IV Medical expensesRs. 6.200V Loss of income during treatment PeriodRs. 6.000VI Discomfort and loss of amenities -Rs. 10,000TotalRs.50.2004. On hearing the learned counsel^ and on reconsideration of the matter, I find that claimant has not adduc...
H .Laxminarayana Ganiga S/O Sheshu GanigA. Vs. Krishnayya Balegara S/O ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard Sri.H.Pavanachandra Shetty. learned counsel for claimant and Sri.b.S.Vivek, learned counsel for insurance company.3. As a result of accident, the claimant had suffered following:a) Avulsion of skin with loss of skin measuring 6x4 cm size over left occipital parietal area of scalpb) Loss of posterior portion of left ear (pinna)c) CT Scan shows mild diffuse cerebral oedema.The claimant was treated in Chinmayi Hospital at Kundapura. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1. 19,300/- under following heads:I Pain and sufferingRs.25.000=00II Medical expensesRs. 9,242=27III Special diet, nursing and Attendant chargesRs. 8.000=00IV Loss of income during Treatment periodRs. 9,000-00V Loss of future income due to disabilityRs.72.000=00VI Conveyance chargesRs. 1, 000=00TotalRs. 1.19.242=27Rounded off to - Rs. 1.19.300=004. On hearing the learned counsel for parties and on reconsideration of the matter. I find tha...
Sri Saurabh Lakhani S/O Bharat Lakhani, and anr. Vs. the Commissioner ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. The only grievance raised in the instant petition filed in public interest is. that during the Aero India -2011 (Air show), it is likely, that enough attention is not paid to recover custom duties.2. During the course of hearing, without issuing notice, we requested Mr.N.R.Bhaskar. Adv. to obtain instructions on the matter from the Commissioner of Customs. Headquarters Office. Bangalore (RespondentNo. 1). We acknowledge our gratitude to Mr.B.Bhattaeharya. the Commissioner of Customs. Headquarters Office. Bangalore for having appealed personally to assist this Court on the issue in hand.3. Mr.Bhattacharva has made a statement to us in Court today affirming, that adequate staff has already been posted for recovering customs duty, as and when the same is due in terms of the provisions of the Customs Act and the notifications issued there under from time to time.4. Based on the statement made by Respondent No.1, we are satisfied, that the cause agitated by the petitioner in public inter...
Vasudeva Naik S/O Late Heriya Nalk. Vs. Mr.Siddique.T S/O Moyin, and a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement, of compensation.2. I have heard Sri.H.Pavariachandra Shetty, learned counsel for claimant and Sri.O.Mahesh, learned counsel for insurance company.3. As per the wound certificate produced by claimant, he ha^ suffered following injuries:a) Lacerated wound over the fore head measuring 10cms x 4cms.b) Head injuryc) Fracture of frontal boned) Fracture of inferior pubic rami right4. This wound certificate was issued by Hi tech Medicare Hospital and Research Centre at Udupi. The claimant has not examined the Doctor who treated him. He has not produced the case sheet and not even produced the CT Scan report to show any injury to brain. The claimant has produced discharge summary which does not contain the information relating to treatment given to him or his condition at the time of discharge.5. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.64.100/- under following heads:I Pain and sufferingRs.35.000II Conveyance- Rs. 2.000III Attendant and nourish...
Mr.Muneer Ahamed S/O Late Yusuf Sahed. Vs. Dr. Ravindra Prabhu S/O Lat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. 1 have heard Sri.H.Pavanachandra Shetty, learned counsel for claimant and Sri.B.S.Vivek, learned counsel for insurance company.3. As a result of the accident, the claimant had suffered abrasion over nose measuring 2x2cms, fracture of III, IV, V. VI ribs of right side, fracture of right clavicle and haemothorax. The claimant was treated in Kasturba Hospital at Udupi. At the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 45 years. He was working as an Auto rickshaw Driver. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.75.000/- under following heads:I Pain and sufferingsRs.30.000II Conveyance-Rs. 2.000III Attendant and nourishing foodRs. 3,000IV Medical Expenses-Rs.21.300V Loss of income during treatment PeriodRs. 9,000VI Discomfort and loss of amenities - Rs. 10.000TotalRs.75.3004. On hearing the learned counsel for parties, and on reconsideration of the matter, I find that compensation awarded under the head 'loss of ameniti...
C.C.Venkatanarasimhaiah S/O Chikka VenkatrayappA. Vs. M/S Vijaya Bank, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. This appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution since the counsel who was appearing for the appellant was absent to recall the order of dismissal dated 10.2.2009, Misc.CVL 7955/2010 is filed to condone the delay of 89 days. According to the appellant, the then counsel Mr.Munegowda could rot appear before the court since he died on 10.9.2007. In the circumstances, he requests the court: to recall the order. Being satisfied with the cause shown by the appellant, delay in filing the application to recall the order dated 10.2.200 9 is condoned and order dated 10.2.200 9 is hereby recalled. Accordingly, these two Misc. Petitions are allowed. RSA is restored to file.2. After restoring the RSA, heard the counsel for the appellant on merits.3. Appellant was the defendant before the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.).. Chickaballapur in C. S . No . 90/2002 . Suit was instituted by Respondent-l/piainv.iff M/s Vijaya Bank of Chikkaballapur Branch for recovery of the loan advanced to the appellant and Responde...
Smt Namita Mondal, and ors. Vs. Sri C.J.Darvi S/O Sri Outha Joseph, an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. The claimants in MVC No.7812/2008 on the file of MACT, Court of Small Causes, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore (SCCH-20) are the appellants in this appeal.2. Facts necessary for consideration of the appeal are that on 3.7.3008 at about 1.30 am, one Ashim Mondal, the husband of the first petitioner, father of the second petitioner and the son of the 3rd and 4th petitioners along with others while travelling in a Jeep bearing Regn No. 199B069273M, the driver of a cm-bearing Regn No.KA-01 /C-9173 has driven the same rashly, negligently and dashed against the jeep, which resulted in an accident and thereby the deceased succumbed to the injuries at Commando hospital. The petitioners have filed the claim application seeking compensation of Rs.30 lakhs. The respondents have entered appearance, filed written statement, admit the validity of the policy regarding the offending vehicle contend that the claim of the petitioners is exaggerated, call upon the claimants to prove the accident. So, pray fo...
Kumari Archana H D/O Hanumanthaiah. Vs. Karnataka State Road Transport ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2011
1. The petitioner is assailing the notification dated 05.01.2011 issued by the respondent-Road Transport Corporation. The petitioner claims to have approached this Court in public interest.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the petition papers. 3. By the impugned notification dated 05.01.2011 (Annexure-A), the respondent has invited short term tenders for operations and maintenance of commercial- cum-retail space at four bus terminals in Karnataka. The case of the petitioner is that the said tender is contrary to the general standing order No.602/2008 dated 04.06.2008 (Annexure-B 1). In this regard, it is contended that the said standing order provides for reservation for scheduled caste and scheduled tribes in KSRTC bus stand commercial shop allotment. In that view, it is contended that if the impugned tender notification is resorted to, without providing benefit of reservation, the same is not only contrary to the decision of the Board of Directors, b...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »