Karnataka Court April 2011 Judgments

Dr. D.K. Seethalakshmi, Vs. the Director Karnataka Institute of Medica ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

Reported in: 2012(3)KCCR75(SN)

(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under article 226 and 227 of the constitution of India, praying to quash the orders passed by the 6th respondent dated 7.11.2008 vide Annexure-E retrospectively absorbing 4th the respondent to the cadre of assistant professor by the 2nd respondent and order dated 30.03.2010 vide Annexure-F, Order dated 23.07.2010 vide Annexure-O order dated 28.02.2006 vide Annexure-L. retrospectively redesignating the 5th respondent as assistant professor and etc.) 1. Misc. W. 60176 of 2010 for amendment filed in WP No.63874 of 2010 to include the additional pleadings along with annexures and for the additional prayer, allowed, recording the submission of Sri. A.C. Purad, learned counsel for the fourth respondent who submits that he has no objection for allowing this application, but requests for some more time to get ready to prepare the main case and to further submit on the merits of the matter. 2. The application for amendment even otherwise deserves to the allo...

G. Somashekara Vs. M.G. Mahanthappa and Another

Court: Karnataka

(This MFA is filed U/s. 173(1) of MV Act, against the Judgment and Award dated 23/08/2007 passed in MVC No.6924/2006 on the file of the IV Addl. Judge, Member, MACT, Bangalore City, SCCH-6, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.) This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 23rd August 2007, passed in M.V.C.No.6924/2006, by the IV Additional Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City, SCCH-6, (for short, ‘Tribunal’) for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs.3,38,416/- (but wrongly mentioned as Rs.3,38,466/-) with interest @ 6% p.a. awarded in favour of the claimant as against his clam for Rs.05.00 Lakhs, is adequate. 2. The appellant claims to be aged about 20 years, working as vegetable vendor, earning substantial amount and hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That the accident occurred at about 7.30 A.M., on ...

Commissioner of Service Tax, Service Tax Vs. M/S. Scott Wilson Kirkpat ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This CEA is filed under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 arising out of order dated 18-10-2006 passed in Final Order 1775/2006 in Appeal No.4/2006, praying to i) to decide the substantial question of law stated therein. ii) set aside the order dated 18-10-2006 passed by the CESTAT, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore produced at Annexure-C and allow this appeal with costs.) 1. This appeal is by the revenue challenging the order passed by the Tribunal that the demand of differential tax both on merits and on limitation and accordingly has set aside the order passed by the assessing officer as well as the first Appellate Authority. 2. M/s Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick (India) Private Limited – the assessee is providing taxable services under the category of ‘Consulting Engineer Service’ and are duly registered under the Finance Act, 1994. The assessee entered into a contract agreement captioned as ‘Project Coordinating Consultancy Services for Karnataka St...

D.J. Ajithprasad Vs. D.G. Nagaraju

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This Crl. Petition is filed U/s. 407 Cr.P.C. by the advocate for the petitioner praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash the order dt: 26.02.11 passed by the Prl. Sessions Judge, Tumkur in Cr.Misc. No. 07/11 and withdraw a case in C.C.No.436/07 pending on the file of the C.J. (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Turuvekere and made over the same to any other Hon’ble Court within the Sessions Division of Tumkur District., for disposal of the same in accordance with law for the offence P/U/S. 138 of N.I. Act. 1. This Petition Under Section 407 Cr.P.C. is filed seeking transfer of C.C.No.436 of 2007 pending on the file of Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC., Turuvekere, to any other court within the session division of Tumkur District in the interest of justice. 2. From the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge and the other papers produced before this Court it is disclosed that the respondent has filed a case against the petitioner/accused under Section 138 of the...

The Commissioner of Customs Vs. M/S. Motorola India Limited

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This CSTA filed U/s. 130 of the customs Act, 1962 praying to set aside the final order No.881/2006 dated 12-05-2006 passed by the Customs, Excise and service Tax Appellate Tribunal, south zonal Bench at Bangalore, vide Annexure-‘B’ and etc.,) 1. This appeal is by the Revenue challenging the order passed by the CESTAT holding that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of DEEC Scheme in terms of Notification No.30/97-Cus dated 1.4.1997 read with para 7.4. of the EXIM policy 1997-2002 and as such he is not liable to pay any custom duty. 2. The assessee is a leading manufacturer of pagers. A specific intelligence received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to the effect that the respondent had stopped manufacturing of pagers and hence a certain portion of the duty-free material imported under DEEC Scheme (with Actual User Condition) had been written off in their books of accounts. As the goods imported under Actual User Condition should only be used for manuf...

Johnn Tuchler Vs. Superintendent of Customs, Bangalore

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This Crl.P. is filed u/s. 439 Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Spl.C.C.No.135/2010 pending on the file of the 33rd Addl.C.C. and S.J.., and Spl.Judge for NDPS, Bangalore, which is registered for the offences P/U/Ss. 20 (b) (ii) (c), 23(c), 28 and 29 of NDPS Act.) 1. The facts reveal that the superintendant of Customers, Air Intelligence Unit, Bangalore, received credible information that three persons including the petitioner are drug carriers, currently in Delhi, would travel to Bangalore and then proceed to United Kingdom along with the suitcases each containing 50 K.gs of Hashish. It was also informed that the Hashish can be seized from the drug carriers by checking luggage thoroughly. It is in pursuance of this information, that the customs authorities with the assistance of the witnesses and other staff went to the International Air port, Bangalore, on 01.11.2009 at about 4 p.m., and intercepted the petitioner, checked his bag and as it did not contain...

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation K.H. Road, Bangalore by Its ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This writ appeal is filed U/S 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in the writ petition No.25148/2005 dated 16/12/2005.) 1. This appeal is filed by respondent KSRTC in W.P.No.25148/05, being aggrieved by the order passed by this Court dated 16.12.2005, wherein, the learned Single Judge of this Court permitted the writ petitioner to avail the services of an Advocate to defend him in the enquiry initiated against him and the petitioner assured effective and regular participation in the enquiry initiated and since both the parties agreed that they would co-operate in completing the enquiry and a time limit may be fixed, it was directed that the enquiry shall be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and accordingly disposed of the writ petition. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 16.12.2005, this appeal is filed by the respondents in the writ petition contending that the domestic enquiry has ...

S.M. Adiga and Others Vs. Syndicate Bank and Another

Court: Karnataka

(Writ Petition No.18992/2003 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order passed by the Respondent Bank dated 03.10.2001 vide Annexure-L, dated 26.12.2002 vide Annexure-Y and dated 28-03-2003 vide Annexure-A and etc., Writ Petition No.40590/2003 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order by the Respondent/Bank dated 16.07.2003 vide Annexure-C and etc., Writ Petition No.30035/2004 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash vide Annexure-Y dated 01.07.2004 passed by the Respondent and etc., Writ Petition No.10563/2005 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash order dated 14.12.04 vide Annexure-V passed by the Bank and etc.,) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution praying to direct the respondent to disburse the pensionary benefits of this petition as per Annexure-B, forthwith and etc., These petitions are heard and disposed...

Krveena Wo Nagesh Vs. Sanjeevashetty So Pogvappa Sheity

Court: Karnataka

1. LRs of H.R.Nagee-h have filed MVC 925/2003 before the Civil Judge (Sri Sri.) & Additional MACT, Hassan seeking compensation in regard to the death of H.R.Nagesh. 2. It is contended by the claimants that on 29.03.2003 at 8.4b a.m., H.R.Nagesh was travelling in a motoi cycle bearing registration No.KA-04-L-8854. While so the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-14 9945 has driven the lorry rashly, negligently and dashed against the motor cycle. It resulted in injuries to H.R.Nagesh and that he succumbed to the injuries on the way to the hospital. 3. It is the case of the claimants that as H.R.Nagesh was the earning member of the family, they being the dependants they lost an earning member of the family. So seek for compensation              4. Insurance Company has filed objections, call upon the petitioners to prove. The accident, its impact, contend that the claim is exaggerated. Pray for dismissal of th...

G. Thimaiah Vs. State by N.E.P.S. Police, Tumkur and Another

Court: Karnataka

Petitioner herein, who has been arrayed as first accused in CC No.627 of 2008, on the file of Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM, Tumkur, for the offences punishable under Sections 417 and 420 read with Section 34, IPC, was ordered to be discharged from the accusation by order dated 8-2-2010 passed by the learned Magistrate, inter alia, on the ground that the materials produced by the investigating officer along with the final report under Section 173, Cr.P.C., prima facie, do not make out any case against the accused persons are entitled to be discharged. However, even before passing of the said order, the second accused died and therefore the case against the said accused abated. By the impugned order, the learned Magistrate discharged the first accused-petitioner. 2. Aggrieved by the said order of discharge passed by the learned Magistrate, the State filed revision petition under Section 397, Cr.P.C. in Criminal Revision Petition No.51 of 2010, on the file of Fast Track (Sessions) J...