Karnataka Court April 2011 Judgments
K.Apoorva Raj @ Rajan, S/O. Late P.Kevivel. Vs. the Managing Director, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-30-2011
1. The petitioner joined the services of the respondent as an Electrician / Maintenance in charge on 31.7.1982. Pending enquiry, he was kept under suspension on 29.10.2000. An Articles of Charge was issued by the respondent to the petitioner on 2.12.2000. The petitioner submitted his reply dated 20.12.2000. The petitioner has denied the charge leveled against him. Being not convinced with the reply and finding that, there is a need for holding an enquiry into the allegations made against the petitioner, an enquiry Officer was appointed on 28.12.2000. The enquiry Officer appointed on 28.12.2000 having not completed the enquiry, in his place, one Sri K.V.Panduranga Rao was appointed on 20.11.2001. The enquiry having been held, there being a report holding that, the allegations leveled against the petitioner have been proved, the petitioner was dismissed from service on 30.07.2002. The order of dismissal was questioned by the petitioner by filing a dispute under S.10(4-A) of the Industria...
Tag this Judgment!Sri. N. MuniramA. S/O R.NarayanappA. Vs. Sri. V.V.Kumar. S/O Late V.Ve ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-29-2011
1) In this Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C, the petitioner has questioned the legality and correctness of the concurrent judgment of the Courts below convicting him tor the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'N.I Act) and sentencing him to pay fine.2) The respondent complainant filed a private complaint against the petitioner herein alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act inter alia contending that for discharge of the debt due by him, the petitioner-accused issued a cheque for Rs.9,50,000/-dated 25.01.2007 drawn on City Bank Branch. Bangalore and when the said cheque was presented for encashment, the same was returned with the Banker's endorsement Account Closed' and in spite of service of notice on him, he failed to pay the amount covered under the cheque. The petitioner-accused appeared before the learned Magistrate and pleaded not guilty for the accusation made against him and claimed ...
Tag this Judgment!B.R. Mohan, Bangalore Vs. the Regional Transport Authority, Bangalore ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-29-2011
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the findings given by the tribunal in respect of RP Nos. 447 and 497/06, dt. 10.1.2007 on the above observations by exonerating the same vide Ann-A.) 1. These writ petitions are disposed of by this common order since they involve common question of law and fact as to whether on the facts of the case, permit could be granted by the first respondent-Regional Transport Authority to operate state carriages in a notified route under the BTS scheme and as to whether they are saved by the amendment of the scheme. 2. It is unnecessary to narrate the facts in detail of all the writ petitions and it would be sufficient if the facts in W.P. No.17700/2006 are referred to as the facts in other cases are also similar to W.P. No.17700/2006 and the question of law involved is also identical. 3. W.P. No.17700/2006 is filed by the stage carriage operator averring that he filed an application...
Tag this Judgment!Sri. T.Bisse Gowda, S/O Late Thase GowdA. Vs. the State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-28-2011
1) Heard Sri. Ravi B. Naik. learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Sri. S.G. Rajendra Reddy, learned, counsel for the respondent-Lokayuktha.2) On a report prepared by the Police Inspector, K.L.A. City Division, Bangalore City, the case in Crime 51/2007 for (he offences punishable under Sections 31(1 He) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 came to be registered against the petitioners herein. Thereafter, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lokayuktha, who investigated the matter, filed 'B' Summary Report. On the said 'B' Summary Report filed by the Investigating Officer, the Special Court issued notice to the complainant. However, the complainant did not file any objections nor protest petition against the 'B' Summary Report. When the said 'B' Summary report was under consideration of the Court, the Investigating Officer filed an application on 26.05.2010 seeking permission 10 conduct further investigation in the matter inter alia on the ground that subsequent t...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Bai and Others Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-28-2011
1. In this petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., the petitioners 1 to 5 who are arraigned as Accused Nos.1 to 5 in Crime No.61/11 of Town Police Chitradurga, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 504, 306 r/w 149 of IPC, have sought for the relief of anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection with the aforesaid non-bailable case registered against them inter alia on the grounds that, they are innocent persons and they have not committed any of the acts alleged in the complaint and even if the entire complaint allegations are accepted as true and correct, it does not make-out any case against them and that they have reasonable apprehension of their arrest by the respondent-police, as such, they are entitled for the relief of anticipatory bail. The petition is opposed by the prosecution. 2. I have heard the learned counsel on both sides. 3. One N.R. Divakardesai Gowda, lodged a complaint at about 1.00 a.m. on 28.02.2011 to the effect that his ne...
Tag this Judgment!Pavan P. Bannikodu Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-28-2011
1. In this petition filed under Section 438, Cr.P.C., the petitioner who has been arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.12/2011 of Harihara Rural Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 427, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC has sought for relief of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest by the said police in respect of the aforesaid case. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner that at this stage, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that he is guilty of any of the acts alleged and that even according to the wound certificate issued by the hospital in respect of the alleged victims, none of them have suffered any grievous injuries on any vital part of the body, therefore, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner has committed an offence under Section 307, IPC along with other offences. It is the contention of the petitioner that the other accused persons have already been granted the relief of an...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Trs Nirman, Represented by Its Managing Partner, Shri. T. Suresh R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
(This Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to appoint a sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes and outstanding issues between the parties in accordance with the provisions of Agreement bearing No. W496/CKM/41 dated 27.07.2005 UCC Code 72268, vide Annexure-G. This Civil Miscellaneous petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to appoint a sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes and outstanding issues between the parties in accordance with the provisions of Agreement bearing No. CAO/CN/BNC/72438/A/122/II/07 dated 08.02.2007. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to appoint a sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes and outstanding issues between the parties in accordance with the provisions of Agreement bearing No.CAO/CN/BNC/72321/A/24/IV/06 dated 04.04.2006. This Civil Miscellaneous Peti...
Tag this Judgment!Devaraj S/O Somashekaraiah, and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka by Tavarek ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2011
1. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 19. 11.2004, passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in Sessions Case No.29/2002 convicting the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 447 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing them to undergo P.I for two yeas and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-each for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- each for the offence punishable under Section 447 IPC read with Section 34 IPC with default clauses.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 01.09.1999 at about 1.30 p.m.. when CW.1 Sarvamangala was washing clothes in front of the vacant place built in house No. 1/102 at Bacchenahatti village within the limits of Tavarekere Police Station, all the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with a common object of assaulting CWs. 1 to 3 and thereafter, holding lethal weapons like clubs, muchu...
Tag this Judgment!B.R.Manjushakar S/O B.N.Raju. Vs. K.R.Jayaprakash S/O J.N. Ramachandra ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-24-2011
1. This appeal is by the claimant seeking for enhancement of compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident2. The facts in brief are:-The Appellant-Claimant filed claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation from the respondents on account of the injuries which lie sustained in a motor accident that took place on 1.9.2006 at about 8.30 p.m. near Vaddarahalli bus stop involving the motor cycle bearing Regn.No.KA-20L-8770 owned by the first respondent and insured with the second respondent at the relevant point of time. In the impugned accident he sustained severe injuries which comprised of fracture and head injury for which he took treatment in the hospital. He spent huge money for the treatment. Despite the same, he is not completely cured of his injuries, due to which, he is unable to carry on his avocation as driver which has resulted in loss of income to him. Hence, he prayed for grant of compensation. After notice, both the respondents i.e....
Tag this Judgment!Sri.Erappa Son of Late GundappA. Vs. Sri. Horakereappa S S/O. Sannaran ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-23-2011
1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the common impugned judgment and award dated 13.8.2008 passed in MVC.No.35/2007 by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and Add!. MACT. Sira. seeking for enhancement of compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident.2. The facts in brief are :-The Appellant-Claimant filed claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation against the respondents in respect of the personal injuries which he sustained in a motor accident that took place on 17.3.2006 at about 7.45 a.m. in front of National Hotel on NH-4 Hiriyur involving the bus bearing Regn. No. KA- 07-N/A-9999 owned by the first respondent and insured with the second respondent at the relevant point of time. In the impugned accident the claimant sustained severe injuries which comprised of fracture to his right leg for which he took treatment in the hospital for 24 days by spending huge money. Despite the same the is not completely cured of his injuries, on accoun...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »