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.
S. R. Govindaraju S/O S.Ramaiahraju. Vs. Krishnegovda S/O Girigowda, a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard Sri H.Pavana Chandra Stietty. learned counsel for claimant and .Sri CR-Ravi shankar. learned counsel for Insurance Company.3. The claimant has contended that he had suffered fracture of inferior pubic rami of left pelvic bone and also injuries to L5 vertebra, resulting in Spondylolisthesis. The claimant was treated in St.Martha's Hospital at Bangalore. The discharge summary shows that claimant was conservatively treated. At the time of discharge, no deformity was found, however claimant had developed bedsores. The claimant has not produced x-rays to show that he had suffered fractures. The claimant has not caused production of case sheet. The in-patient bill as per Ex.P.7 does not show that claimant had suffered fractures as contended by him. The Tribunal left with no option has awarded global compensation of Rs.27,000/-.4. The claimant was aged about 55 years at the time of accident and he was working as a ...
Ms.Malini.H.C D/O Late Cm.Hosamani. Vs. the New India Assurance Co. Lt ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement, of compensation.2. I have heard Sri Giridhar.H. learned counsel for claimant.3. As a result, of accident, claimant had suffered fracture of left tibial plateau. The claimant was treated in M.S.Ramaiah Medical Teaching Hospital at. Bangalore. The claimant has undergone operation for reduction of fracture. At the time of accident, claimant, was aged about 35 years; she was working as a Craft Teacher in Government High School at Makali, Bangalore North District. PW2 Di.Bauarji B.H., on subsequent examination of claimant has stated that claimant, suffers from restricted movements of left lower limb. The claimant has to suffer pain and inconvenience during normal activities of life.4. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,51,426/- under following heads:-1. Pain and suffering:Rs.30.000/-2. Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life:Rs. 15.009/-3. Medical and incidental charges:Rs.50,000/-4. Loss of earnings during period ofRs.24.457/-trea...
Triveni Friends Re-creation Sports Club (Regd.). Vs. the Superintenden ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondents.2. In this writ petition, petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents net to insist upon it to obtain a license under the Licensing Order,3. The case of the petitioner is that it is an association duly registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 with the object of providing recreation facilities to its members. The petitioner-Association, it is urged in the writ petition, is conducting social and entertainment activities such as carom, chess, badminton and Rummy. It: is the further contention of the petitioner that for carrying out these activities, the petitioner is not required to obtain any license from the respondents, much less as required under Section 31 of the Karnataka Police Act, However, the respondents have been insisting the petitioner to obtain license WP 6008/2011 and are also interfering with the lawful activities of the petitioner. Hen...
Sri. H R Ranganath S/O Late H R Rajanna Setty. Vs. Sri. T S Ramamurthy ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. The rejection of the petitioners LA No. 16 under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC to amend the written statement, in O.S.No.40/2006 by order dated 9.12,2010 of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) b JMFC, Bangarpet. is called in question in this petition.2. In the suit instituted by the1st respondent for ejectment arraigning the petitioner as the 2nd defendant, on notice, entered appearance and resisted the suit by filing written statement interalia denying the allegations and setting a title in himself under an agreement of sale said to be the subject matter of O.S.No.43/2006 before the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), KGF for specific performance arid specifically contending that Defendants 3 to 8 have no manner of right, title or interest in the suit schedule property. The Court below framed issues and the parties entered trial whence the plaintiff tendered evidence and on closure of his side, the suit was listed fur recording the evidence of the defendant.--. Ai this stage, petitioner filed I.A.No 16 under Order 6 R...
Khaleel-ur-rehman. Vs. Chief Secretary Gok, and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. Mr.S.Kalayan Basavaraj. Assistant Solicitor General is directed to take notice for respondent No.2.2. The petitioner is questioning the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (fur short Tribunal) dismissing his application on 30.7.2008. The petitioner has sought tor the following reliefs before the Tribunal:(i) To set aside the Notice No.DPAR 57 3PS 2006 dated 02.06.2006 (Annexure A2) issued to the applicant under Rule 10 of All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1969 by the respondent.(ii) To set aside the Government Order No.DPAR 57 SPS 2006 dated 17.03.2007 ordering enquiry and appointing Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer, respectively under Rule 8 (21 and Rule 8 (6) (e) of All India Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules 1969 (Annexure A1).(iii) To award the cost of this application: and(iv) To pass such other orders as deemed fit and expedient in the circumstances of the case.2. The facts can he summarized as follows: The applicant at relevant point of...
Sri B T Nagarajaiah. Vs. Sri Jayanna, and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. The 2nd defendant in O.S.No.230/06 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & JMFC, Gubbi, has presented this petition for a writ of mandamus to declare that allowing the benefit of amendment of prayer declaring the sale deed dt. 20/2/1997 and rectification deed dt. 3/5/1997 as void and not binding, on the plaintiff, is illegal and contrary to the order passed in W.P.7363/09 and for a mandamus directing the trial Court to decide the suit on the basis of the plaint averments and reliefs prior to amendment, and the written statement.2. It is not in dispute that I.A.No.17 under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was filed by the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint to add the relief to declare the sale deed dt. 20/2/1997 and the rectification deed dt. 3/5/1997 as void and not binding on the plaintiff. That application when allowed by order dt. 7/3/2009 was carried in W.P.No.7363/09. This court by order dt. 24/8/2009 dismissed the petition and put the plaintiff on the following terms:a. The first resp...
Smt.Nanjamma W/O Late Lakshminarasappa, and ors. Vs. Gangadharaiah S/O ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. This is a claimants appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard Sri T C.Sathishkumar. learned counsel for claimants and Sri Range gowda, learned counsel for Insurance Company.3. The claimants are the wife, daughter and sons of deceased Lakshminarasappa. who died in a motor vehicle accident that took place on 1 1.06.2008.4. The Tribunal has held that deceased was aged about 58 years and earning of Rs.3,000/- per month. The Tribunal by applying '9' multiplier appropriate to the age of 58 years, after deducting 1/3rd of the income towards personal and living expenditure of deceased, has awarded compensation of Rs.2,16,000/- towards "loss of dependency", Rs.5.000/- is awarded towards "loss of consortium", Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards "transportation of dead body", Rs. 10,000/-is awarded towards "loss to estate" and Rs. 10,000/- is awarded towards "funeral expenses'.5. The learned counsel for claimants would submit that deceased was aged about 55 years at the time of accident...
Sri R Srinivasan. S/O a S Ramaswamy Iyengar, and ors. Vs. Vaishnavi. W ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. These two petitions arise out of one and the same order passed by the trial court granting maintenance of Rs.20.000/ to the petitioners in Crl.Mis.No.72/09 who arc the wife and son of the 1st respondent before it and other directions given in respect of compensation and alternative accommodation and further the said order of the trial court being modified by the Fast. Track Sessions Court XVI. Bangalore City in Crl. A. No.36/10 only insofar as the quantum of maintenance is concerned and the lower appellate court modified the amount from Rs.20.000/- to Rs. 12.000/-. Thus, both the petitioners before the trial court viz.. wife and the son as well as the husband are aggrieved by the order passed by the lower appellate court. Under these circumstances, these petitions are disposed of by this common order.2. Brief facts are that the petitioners in Crl.R.P.No.831/10 who are the wife and son in Crl. Mis.No.72/09 before the trial court u/s 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violenc...
Sri Ajay Singh. S/O Lakshman Singh. Vs. Smt.Shalini Bai, W/O Ajay Sing ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. Heard both sides in respect of the petition filed by the petitioner-husband and his grievance is that. against the order of the trial court granting monetary relief in the form of Rs.62.000/- towards the medical expenses. Rs. 1,400/- p.m. towards monthly medical expenses Rs.5.000/- towards surgery and Rs. 1.000/ p.m. towards educational expenses and maintenance of his son. He moved the lower appellate court and the appeal was dismissed mainly on the ground of delay in filing the appeal being not properly explained.2. The submission made is that the appellate court ought to have heard the case on merits instead of dismissing the appeal on the ground of the application filed for condonation of delay itself being rejected. Therefore stating that the petitioner himself has spent more than Rs. 1.00.000/- towards the treatment of his son. lie ought to have been given opportunity to make his say before the appellate court on the merits of the order passed by the trial court on I.A.No.1.3. ...
M.L.Raghunandan S/O MuttammA. Vs. K.V.Ramesh, and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement, of compensation.2. I have heard Smt .M.C.Umadevmma. learned counsel for claimant and Sri M.Arnri Ponappa, learned counsel for Insurance Company.3. As a result of accident, claimant had suffered fracture of upper 1/3rd of left humerus. The claimant was treated in Jayanagar Orthopaedic Centre at Bangalore. The claimant underwent operation for redaction of fracture. At the time of accident, claimant was working as a Senior Marketing Sales Executive in M/s.Manipal Motors Private Limited, on monthly salary of Rs. 15.000/-. The claimant had spent a sum of Rs.40,559/- towards medical expenses. The claimant has to undergo one more operation for removal of implants.4. As per evidence of PW2-Dr.B.Ramesh, claimant has restricted movements of left upper limb. The claimant cannot bear weight by left upper limb. There is wasting of muscles of left upper limb. PW2 has assessed permanent physical disability of left upper limb at 36% and 12% with referenc...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »