Karnataka Court March 2011 Judgments

24 X 7 Learning Private Limited. Vs. ZaIn Family Trust a Private Trust ...

Court: Karnataka

1. The plaintiff in O.S. 7/2009 has come up in this appeal challenging the order dated 03.10.2009, passed on l.A. 1 filed, under Order 38, Rule 4 of CPC.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the appeal are referred to by their rank in the court below3. Brief facts leading to this appeal arc as under:The appellant who is the plaintiff In the court below, stated to have entered into negotiation with the defendant for taking the premises belonging to respondent on lease for locating its office. The case of the plaintiff is that since the negotiation did not come through, as the plaintiff did not secure Occupancy Certificate in respect of the building in question, the plaintiff did not take the premises in question on lease for locating its office. It is also their case that at the time of commencing the negotiation, to show their bonafide. they had deposited a sum of Rs.4.16,500/- being one month's rent as token deposit for negotiation.4. It is their case that since defendant was...

Mr.Adarsh Jalan. S/O Mr.S.Sudhir Jalan, and anr. Vs. Government of Kar ...

Court: Karnataka

1. By the consent of the parties, the matter is heard on merits though the matter is listed for admission.2. The first petitioner is stated to be the Managing Director of the Neo Foods Private Limited (for short "the Company'). The second petitioner is stated to be the Manager of the Factory owned by the said Company. On 12.11.2009. Assistant Director of Factories. Tumkur Division, Tumkur visited the Factory run by the said Company and during the inspection, he said to have noticed several violations of the Factories Act. 1948 (for short 'the Act') and the Karnataka Factories Rules. 1969 (for short 'the Rules') framed there under. In that behalf, he submitted a report dated 12.1 .2009. Based on the said report, show cause notice was issued to petitioner's herein and the said notice was replied by the Company. However, in the meanwhile, criminal prosecution was launched for the offence punishable under Section 92 of the Act against these petitioners. Upon service of summons from the jur...

icici Lombard Motor Insurance Company. Vs. Narayanamma, W/O. Late Chik ...

Court: Karnataka

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 14.04.2009 when deceased Chikkavenkataravana was riding his two wheeler vehicle bearing registration KA-03-L-7584 towards Mulbagal - Ramasandra road near Councilor Chandrappa's land, a lorry bearing registration No.AP-04-T-3699 came in high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his two wheeler, as a result he sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was shifted to Govt. Hospital. Mulbagal and then to R.L. Jaiappa Hospital. Tamaka and thereafter he was shifted to Victoria Hospital. Bangalore wherein he died. His wife and three minor children and...

The Manager. Tata Aig Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. PauIn Mary, W/O. Lat ...

Court: Karnataka

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 01.10.2009 when deceased S. Das was riding his bicycle on Bangalore-Hosur N.H.7 road, near IBP petrol bunk. Bommasandra, a ear bearing registration No. KA-02- MA-6990 came in high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his bicycle, as a result he fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was shifted to Sparsh Hospital. Bangalore and then to St. John Hospital. Bangalore and on the way to hospital, he died. His wife and three major children filed a claim petition before MACT. Bangalore seeking compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- and the ...

M/S Prince Recreation Association. Vs. State of Karnataka, by Its Secr ...

Court: Karnataka

1. The learned Addl. Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondents,2. As the matter arises in a short compass and is covered by a judgment of this court, the same is taken up for final disposal with the consent of both the parties.3. In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents not to insist upon the petitioner for obtaining license to many on lawful recreational activities and functions in the petitioner-Association,4. 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 recreational and social activities such as rampling, rock climbing, trekking, para sailing, koyking. rafting, carom. chess, snooker, billiards, pools, cricket, dots, volley ball, hockey. skilled games, card games by playing rummy, p...

Fahim Khan. Vs. State of Bihar.

Court: Karnataka

1. The facts leading to this appeal by way of special leave are as under :Fahim Khan-the appellant, herein alongwith two others Chotna @ Chottu @ Karim Khan and Arsad Hussain @ Arsad @ Arsad Kadri Hussain was put on trial for having committed the murder of Sagir Hasan Siddique. The Trial Court by its judgment dated 15th June, 1991 in Sessions Trial No.122 of 1990 acquitted all the accused holding that the prosecution story had not been proved. The State of Bihar challenged this judgment in the High Court in appeal. The appeal was allowed by a Division Bench by its judgment dated 13th April, 2000 and the matter was remitted to the trial court to pass a fresh judgment on the evidence already adduced by the parties after hearing them denovo. The accused, however, approached this court in Criminal Appeal No.661 of 2001. The order of the High Court was set aside on the 12th May, 2001 and the matter was sent back with a direction that the High Court should itself go into the merits of the ca...

Vishwanath Shetty, Padangadi Vs. Vincent Pinto, Padangady and Another

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This MFA is filed u/s 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 11.07.2008 passed in MVC.NO.915/2004 on the file of member, MACT-IV and III Additional District Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.) 1. Though this matter is listed for admission, with the consent of the Learned counsel for the respective parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 2. This appeal is by the claimant challenging the liability fastened on the first respondent-owner and absolving the liability as against the second respondent-insurer. 3. The brief facts of the case are: The appellant-claimant instituted claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation in respect of the personal injuries which he sustained in a motor accident that took place on 25.02.2004 at about 7.00 p.m., near Achina in Padangady village involving Autorickshaw bearing registration No.KA-21-6390, owned by the first respond...

Shashikant S/O Ramrao Kulkarni.Vs. Smt.Nirmala W/O Vasantrao Gore.

Court: Karnataka

1 Heard Shri C.R.Deshpande, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri D.G.Nagode, learned Counsel for the Respondent.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2 This is a petition by the original defendant raising exception to the order dated 23.09.2010, passed by 5th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Latur, below Exhibit23 in Regular Civil Suit No.447/2009.2 Petitioner herein, (referred to as 'the defendant'), tendered an application under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, requesting the Court to reject the plaint. The application tendered by the petitioner came to be rejected. Hence, this Civil Revision Application.3 Plaintiff instituted suit claiming recovery of an amount of Rs.39,000/ towards arrears of rent against the defendant. It is the contention of plaintiff that defendant is a tenant in respect of residential premises which were let out to him. The monthly rent was fixed at Rs.1500/ per...

K. Mohan Rao Vs. B.K. Susheela and Others

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2011(3)KCCR2372(DB); 2011(5)KantLJ140(DB)

1. This appeal is filed by the unsuccessful petitioner in W.P. No.10640/2008, wherein the learned single Judge of this Court has declined to quash: the award passed by the Arbitrators(Annexure ‘B” to the writ petition) dated 10.08.1986; the endorsement issued by the Sub-Registrar, Mangalore, dated 11.08.1988; the judgement and decree passed by the Court of the Prl. Munsiff, Mangalore, dated 20.07.1995 (Annexures ’H’ and ‘J’ to the writ petition) dismissing I.A.I filed by the  writ petitioner (appellant herein) under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, in A.c No. 6/1989 and the judgment and decree passed by the I Addl. District Judge, D.K., Mangalore, in R.A. No. 72/2004 dated 25.03.2008 (Annexure ‘K’ and ‘L’ to the writ petition), Wherein the order of the trail Court dismissing I.A.I, the application filed by the appellant herein was conformed. 2. The appellant herein filed  W.P. No.10640/2008 averring t...

Mahaveer @ Vilas Shanthappa @ Shantagowda Patil and Others Vs. Sukumar ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2011ILR(Kar)2077; 2011(4)KCCR3329(DB)

MANJUNATH, J 1. The legality and correctness of the judgment and decree dated 27.06.2005 in O.S.No.34/1997 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Chikkodi, is called in question in this appeal. 2. Appellants are the plaintiffs and respondents are the defendants before the Trial Court. In this judgment, for convenience, the parties are referred to their status before the Trial Court. 3. Plaintiffs contend that the common propositor Ganesh @ Ganapathi had two sons by name Tulajagonda and Shantagowda @ Shanta. After the demise of common propositor Ganesh and his wife Lakshmi Bai, his two sons Tulajagonda and Shantagouda succeeded to the schedule properties and other properties and continued as members of joint family. In the year 1944 the two brothers got partitioned some properties and continued in joint possession in respect of some other properties. After partition in 1944 both the brothers were residing separately. The plaint schedule properties are the properties continued in the joint p...