Karnataka Court March 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.
M.L. MunikrishnA. S/O. Lakkappa, and anr. Vs. the State of Karnataka R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. Both Petitioners 1 and 2 wore inducted Into the service of the Corporation of the City of Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as BBMP) as .Junior Engineers. Whilst Petitioner No. 1 was inducted into the sen-ice of ihc BBMP on 03-08-1981. Petitioner No.2 came to be appointed as such on 13-02-1980. It is also relevant to notice here, that both the petitioners, at. the time of their entry into service of the BBMP, in the cadre of Junior Engineer, possessed qualification of Diploma in Civil Engineering.2. When the petitioners herein acquired the qualification of Degree in Engineering, they were appointed as Assistant Engineers. Whilst Petitioner No.1 came to be appointed as Assistant Engineer on 20-12-1988. Petitioner No.2 was appointed as such in June 1990. The rest of the career profile of the petitioners is irrelevant for the present controversy.3. In so far as Respondent No.4 is concerned, he admittedly came to be inducted into the sendees of BBMP in the cadre of Assistant Engineer. ...
B.R. Shetty S/O. Late A. Shambu Shetty. Vs. M/S. Kone Elivator India L ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. In this case, the petitioner has called hi question the validity of the order dated 10.1.2009 passed in O.S. No.20/2002 by the III Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and JMFC, Mangalore O.K. the petitioner is the plaintiff in the said suit and the respondent is the defendant. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their respective rankings before the Trial Court.2. The plaintiff filed the above suit against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.3.54,500/- with interest a!. 20% p.a. from the date of the suit till the date of payment. It. is the case of the plaintiff that he intended to install an automatic passenger elevator for his house at Udupi. In that connection, his architect held discussion with the branch manager of the defendant-company regarding installation and supply of elevator. The branch manager forwarded a letter dated 22.9.1998 along with the enclosures to the General Power of Attorney Holder of the plaintiff. Since the terms and conditions spe...
Dr (Mrs) Parvali.S.Hosamani. Vs. the Karnataka State Pollution Control ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order passed cm 08.02.2011 by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, requiring the petitioner to close down all hospital activities. The Managing Director, as also, the employees of the HESCQM, have been directed to disconnect the power supply to the petitioner. This direction is also to be given effect to. forthwith2. The issue which is the subject matter of consideration is. effective treatment of bio-medical waste, before the same could be released from the hospital, nursing home, clinic, dispensary, pathological laboratory, blood bank or the like. The term Bio-Medical Waste has been defined in Rule 3(5) of the Bio-Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 (for short The 1998 Rules). Rule 3(5) of the aforesaid Rules is being extracted hereunder;"Bio-Medical Waste" means any waste, which is generated during the diagnosis, treatment or immunisation of human beings or animals or in research activities...
Devaraj, S/O Late ParasappA. Vs. Sridhar C Balegar S/O R.Chandrashekar ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. Both these appeals are by the claimants in MVC Nos.8230 & 8231/06 on the file of XIII Additional Small Cause Judge & Member MACT, Bangalore.2. Parties will be referred to according to their status find in the court below for convenience. The applications are tiled u/s 166 of MV Act. It is claimed by the petitioners that on 25.09.06 at 5 p.m. the petitioners were moving in a TVS bearing Registration. No. KA-06-X-6201 through NH-206 from college to their residence. While Devraj the rider reached Siddartha Medical College, the driver of a TATA SUMO bearing Registration No.KA- 12-M-5408 has dashed against the TVS vehicle. So petitioners sustained injuries. So pray for compensation.3. PWs.1 to 3 are examined. Exhibits P-1 to P 24 are marked. The learned trial judge has awarded a sum of Rs. 1, 16,400/ to the claimant in MVC No.8230/06. Rs.2,68,500 to the claimant in MVC No.8231/06. The claimants have preferred these appeals seeking enhancement.4. Learned advocate for the claimants contend...
T.Mallesh S/O.ThannellappA. Vs. M/S National Insurance Company Ltd, an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. Though this matter is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsels for respective parties as records have also been received, it is taken up for final disposal.2. This is claimant's appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation in respect of the injuries, which he has sustained in a motor accident. 3. The appellant-claimant has sustained fractures of lower end of right, radius and nasal bone. This is fortified from the evidence of PW2, the medical officer. The Tribunal taking into account the nature of injuries, treatment that he has taken, amount that he has spent, the income and avocation of the claimant and the percentage of disability that lie has suffered, has awarded total compensation of Rs.1,46,800/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till realisation. Being aggrieved of the quantum of compensation, the appellant is in appeal before this Court.4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has not awarded just and reasonab...
Zabulla @ Munna, S/O Syed Rafio. Vs. State of Jayanagar Police, Shimog ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. In this revision petition filed under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. the petitioner who was accused in C.C.No.219/95 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Shimoga. has questioned the legality and correctness of the concurrent judgment of the courts below convicting him for the offence punishable under Sections 392 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment as also to pay fine.2. The case of the prosecution in brief was that on 1.3.1999 at about 8.00 p.m. when PWs.1 to 3 were returning from Ganapathi temple at Ravindranagar, Shimoga, the petitioner herein along with another person came from behind on a bicycle, snatched the gold chain of PW. 1 and went away from the place; on hearing the cries of PWs.1 to 3, PWs.4 and 9 chased the culprits on a motorcycle, caught hold of the petitioner herein near Chennappa Lay Out; at that place PWs.1 to 3 identified the petitioner as the person who snatched the chain; on search of the person of the petitioner, a gold chain was found ...
Sri.P.N. RamachandrA. S/O.Late.P.NagappA. Vs. the State of KarnatakA. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. Petitioner has challenged the legality and correctness of the order dated 23-3-2010 passed by the State Government leasing the land belonging to Sree Karanji Anjaneva Swamy Temple measuring 100 x 50 feet in favour of the third respondent for construction of Panduranga Svvamy Temple.2. The petitioner has contended that Sree Karanji Anjaneva Swamy Temple is an ancient temple situated at Basavanagudi, Bangafore. The said Temple is a notified institution tinder Hindu Religious Institutions Charitable and Endowment Act, 1997 (herein after referred to as 'Endowment Act'). Further lite said temple is also notified by the Archeologieal Department as a protected temple. The grievance of the petitioner is that without following the procedure prescribed under Section 62 of the Endowment Act read with Rule 28. the State Government has leased the land in favour of the third respondent violating Rules 31(1) and 31(3) of the Rules The petitioner claimed that he is a devotee of Anjaneya Swamy and e...
Superintending Engineer (Elec)., Chamundeshwari Electricity Supply Cor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. The grievance in this writ petition is now been confined to the payment of backwages to the extent of Rs.3,54,639/- by the petitioner to me respondent.2. Facts which are not in dispute are:The respondent/workman was an overseer/meter reader in the petitioner's establishment. Alleging commission of misconduct by the respondent, departmental enquiry was initiated on 29.1.1988. Enquiry having been conducted, tinding the alleged misconduct as having been proved, petitioner terminated the services of the respondent by an order dated 25.1.1989. Dispute having arisen, Government by its order dated 24.10.1990 made a reference of the dispute under S.10(l)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('the act' for short) to the Labour Court. After adjudication the reference was accepted and the workman who was directed to be reinstated into service with full backwages with continuity of service and all consequential benefits by an award dated 18.2.1994 of the Labour Court at Mysore. During the pe...
The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation. Vs. Chikkaraje Urs, S/ ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. The respondent was a driver in the petitioner-Corporation. On 18.03.1997, the respondent was on duty, driving the bus bearing No.MEF-2246 from Marballi Hundi to Mysore. While driving the said Dus on that route, on that day, it is alleged that a passenger travelling in the bus on footboard fell down, came under the wheel of the bus, sustained fatal injuries and succumbed on the spot. After receipt of the information about the accident, an Officer-was sent for inspection to investigate and submit the report. The Officer having conducted the spot enquiry and drawn spot rnahazar with the help of the persons who were present at the spot and the police, submitted the report. On receipt of TR 18 and the connected records, the petitioner initiated disciplinary proceedings against respondent by issuing a show cause notice, since h< daily wage driver. The explanation submitted by the respondent having been found to be not convincing, the petitioner appointed an Inquiry Authority to find out t...
Taluk Social Welfare Officer, Kolar Taluk, and anr. Vs. K,v. Srinivasa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2011
1. The respondent herein tiled claim petition under S.10(4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act), in the Labour Court at Bangalore claiming that, he was employed by Dist. Social Welfare Officer, Kolar (petitioner herein), on daily wages with effect from 1.7.1996 and that he worked continuously upto 30.7.05, till he was illegally terminated from service i.e., without issue of notice or payment of wages in lieu thereof. He claimed that, he had worked for more than 240 days in a year and for about 9 years against a sanctioned post and the action of terminating his service besides being arbitrary is illegal and is nothing but victimization and unfair labour practice.2. The 2nd petitioner herein filed counter statement and denied the claim of the respondent herein as put forth in the claim statement. The engagement, continuous work for 240 days in a year as asserted by the workman was specifically denied.3. The Labour Court by its Award dated 6.9.07 held that, the te...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »