Karnataka Court March 2011 Judgments
H. Surendra Shetty. S/O Late A. Sanjeeva Shetty. Vs. Vijaya Bank.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent.2. The facts briefly stated are as follows: The petitioner had joined the services of the respondent-Bank in April 1972 in the lowest position in the Officer's cadre. It is claimed that by dint of his hard work and devotion to duty, lie rose to the position of Deputy General Manager, a post in Top Management Grade Seale-VI. The petitioner claims that he had rendered service without any blemish with a service record spanning over three decades and he was due to retire on reaching the age of superannuation on 31.1.2004. When he was working; as Assistant General Manager of the Bank at Barakhamba Road Branch, Delhi during the period from 18.9.1995 to 21.7.1997, he was promoted on account of his performance as Deputy General Manager. However, by a letter dated 4.1.1999, he was called upon to offer his remarks with regard to sanction of temporary over draft in respect of the current account of M/s.Kunal Travels Private Limite...
Tag this Judgment!G.Byrappa, S/O. Late Gangabyraiah. Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its S ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. By the order dated 30.9.1984 the Land Tribunal, Bangalore North Taluk, produced at Annexure-A has conferred occupancy rights to as many as 163 persons. Different extent of land has been granted to each of the petitioners. Alter the order, the petitioners approached the Tahsildar for issue of Form No. 10. But the same has not been issued. Hence the petitioner has presented this writ petition.2. Section 55 of the Land Reforms Act. hereinafter referred to as the Act', contemplates that on receipt of the final orders passed under sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) of Section 48-A of the Act. shall issue certificate to that extent declaring that the tenant has been registered as tin occupant and the certificate shall be the conclusive evidence of such registration.3. Rule 21 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, authorises the Tahsildar to issue certificate in Form No. 10. Rule 21(C) further contemplates that IMMEDIATELY on receipt of the final orders passed by the Tribunal u/s 48-A confe...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Vasanthi W/O Late a Patrick, and ors. Vs. the National Insurance ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. Even though the appeal is listed for orders on application for condo nation of delay with consent of both the counsel it is taken up for final disposal.2. We notice that there is delay of 131 days in filing the appeal. We have perused the affidavit filed in support of the application. Cause shown is accepted. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned.3. Claimants who are the widow and children are before this Court seeking enhancement.4. Mr. K T Gurudev prasad, learned counsel appearing for the claimants-appellants submits that in the normal circumstance the income of the retired person ought to have been taken at Rs.2,5O0/ . whereas the tribunal has taken it at Rs.2.000/-. He submits that in the circumstance the compensation in so far as loss of dependency requires enhancement.5. Mr. L Sreekanta Rao, learned counsel appearing for the insurer submits that the compensation awarded is just6. We have perused the papers. Apparently in the companion appeals this Court has recorded a finding...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Jaleel S/O Mohammed Ibrahim. Vs. Chief General Manager Telecom - ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. In this writ petition, petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to remove the tower erected by the BSNL [Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited] in the land bearing Sy. No.40 measuring 5 acres 12 guntas situated at Avaragere Village Bidadi Hobli. Ramanagar Taluk.2. A direction is also sought against the Chief General Manager. Telecom-BSNL and the General Manager [Administration], BSNL to consider the representation dated 24.1.2011 submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-G.3. It is the case of the petitioner that originally land belonged to late Gulam Hussain - the grandfather of the petitioner. The same was later transferred in the name of the wife of Gulam Hussain who in turn executed a Hiba in favour of the petitioner on 10.8.1992. By virtue of the or Hiba, it is urged that the petitioner has become absolute owner of the property in question.4. It is also contended by the petitioner that he had approached the revenue authorities for effecting change of khata in h...
Tag this Judgment!AshwIn Sunder, S/O V.Shyam Sunder. Vs. the State by Vivek Nagar Police ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. This writ petition is the offshoot of the dispute and difference that has arisen between the petitioner and respondent No.2 in connection with the custody of their only-daughter. This Court by order dated 22.03.2011 has disposed of the connected Writ Petition No.9070/2010 directing the parties to adhere to the interim arrangement made for the custody of the child and for the visitation rights as per the order passed by this Court on 09.06.2010 in the said petition.2. Both the petitioner and the respondent No.2 are present before the Court.3. As it is submitted by the learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the complaint registered in Crime No.77/2010 was filed in view of the action of the petitioner in trying to remove the child from the custody of the mother and also because the child was having asthmatic problem requiring care and love of the mother and as no ingredients of the offence alleged in the complaint filed against the petitioner under Sections 498(A), 323, 504 & 506 IPC...
Tag this Judgment!Rangafpa S/O ThimappA. Vs. State of Karnataka by State Public Prosecut ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. Accused in CC No. 16/2002 on the file of Addi. CJ (JD) JMFC, Karkala is the revision petitioner.2. The case of the prosecution against the accused is for an offence under Section.381 or IPC!. It is contended that the accused was working in the house of D.R.Raju. On 24.11.2001 Raju has gone out of station. The accused in between 9.30 pm to 12.30 early hours on the night of 24/25.11.2001, has opened the box in the house, stolen jewellery worth Rs.53,000/-, has concealed the jewellery, entered back the house, tied himself, pretended that he has been beaten and the valuables were stolen. The State contends that the accused involved in heinous offence. Presence of the accused is secured. PWs. 1 to 10 are examined. Exhibits P-l to P-7 are marked. Statement of the accused is recorded. The learned Magistrate has convicted the accused. The said conviction is challenged by the accused in Crl. Appeal No.5/2006 on the file of Sessions Judge Udupi. The learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Bellary Oxygen Company Pvt Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Comm ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. Learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice.2. In vie-v of the urgency expressed, since no jurisdictional point is involved, the matter is taken up for disposal.3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.4. By order dated 22.8,2009 the respondent-Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. Davangere, has passed the reassessment order imposing penalty and interest on the petitioner under Section 39(1.) and 72(2) of the KVAT Act of 2003 for the tax periods May 2006. August 2006 to March 2007 having found that there is non disclosure of certain of the aspects. The said order was disputed by die petitioner before the first appellate authority, which in turn, after healing in a detailed order has dismissed the appeal, against which, petitioner has approached the Appellate Tribunal and obtained an order of stay by depositing 50% of the re-assessment order and also furnished Dank guarantee for the remaining 50% of the amount. Sine?, the sta...
Tag this Judgment!N.Narasoji Rao. S/O Late Nagoji Rao. Vs. Smt.SharadammA. W/O Late Thip ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. The petitioner claiming to be the owner of the site said to have been allotted to him by Bangalore Development Authority ( for short 'BDA) filed a complaint before Girinagar Police alleging that at about 9.00 p.m.. on 21.07.2003 when ne was sitting outside the shed constructed on the said site, the respondent herein along with several other persons came near the shed, demolished the shed mid thereby caused loss to him to an extent of Rs.40,000/- to 50,000/-. On the basis of the said complaint Girinagar Police registered the complaint and took-up investigation and after completing investigation filed charge sheet against the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 427 r/w. 34 of IPC. During the trial, the petitioner was examined as PW. 1, his son Sri. Adishesha Rao was examined as PW.2 and a witness to the spot mahazar was examined as PW.3. The respondent-accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against her in the evidence of prosecution witness...
Tag this Judgment!The National Insurance Company Limited. Vs. Narasimha Murthy, S/O. Lat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. This appeal is by the Insurer of the offending vehicle challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Heard. The appeal is admitted and with the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.3. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition.4. Brief facts of the case as pleaded in the claim petition are:That, on 16.06.2007 when the claimant was proceeding as a pillion rider in a TVS Heavy Duty Moped bearing registration No.KA-43-H-5088 ridden by his brother towards his village Beeramangala from Gowribidanur town on Gowribidanur -Chikkaballapur, road near Mudugauakunte gate, a 'Tata Indica car bearing registration No. KA-09-A-5970 came from opposite direction at high speed in a rash and negligent manner came to the wrong side of the road and dashed against the TVS Moped, as a result the claimant sustained grievous injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition before MACT. Ban...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Blue Star Limited, Ozon Manay Tech Park. Vs. M/S Innovative Studio ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 433(E) & (F), 434 & 439 of the Companies Act with a prayer to wind up the respondent company and to appoint liquidator contending that respondent company is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 13,16,992/ with interest at. 21% per annum.2. During the pendency of the proceedings a compromise has been entered into between the petitioner and respondent and a compromise petition to the said effect has been filed in Court on 9-3-2011. The Manager Commercial of the petitioner company who has presented the petition is present in person. The respondent company is represented by its authorised signatory and Director Smt.Radhika Achuthan who is also present before Court and submits that contents of compromise petition has been accepted by respondent-company. It is stated by authorised signatory of respondent-company that she has been authorised to sign the present compromise petition on behalf of respondent-company and resolution has been passed by the B...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »