Karnataka Court June 2011 Judgments
Sri.Shiva Prasad, Son of Y.T.Hanumaiah, Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. As in these petitions the petitioner is common, this pitition were heard together and are being disposed of by this common. 2. In all these petitions, the common petitioner has been accused of the offences punishable under Sections 457 & 380 IPC in the respect of instances of theft in temples situated within jurisdiction of Kodigenahalli and Madugiri Police Stations. It is the contention of the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner that m all these cases there has been inordinate delay in filing the complaint and delay has not been explained and that apart initially the cases had been registered against unknown persons and subsequently, this petitioner has been roped in all these cases. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records produced along with the petitions. No doubt, on the basis of the complaint lodged by the persons concerned with the management of the temples where the instances of theft said to have occurred, the cases were registe...
Tag this Judgment!Mr Vijay C Kapoor Son of Late Harnamdas Kapoor and ors. Vs. the Specia ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the preliminary notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) dated 24.4.1976 (Annexure-E) and the final notification issued under Section 6 of the said Act dated 25.4.1977 (Annexure-F) on the ground that the acquisition of the land of the petitioners has lapsed. the petitioners have also challenged order dated 8.2.2011 issued by respondent No.3 (Annexure-H) and have sought a direction to respondent Nos.3 an 4 to restore revenue records of the schedule properties in the name of the petitioners. 2. The petitioners have averred that lands bearing Sy.Nos.2/2 and 5/7 of Makali Village. Nelamangala taluk, totally measuring 8 acres 12 gomas was a subject matter of conveyance in favour of the partnership firm in the name and style of Kapoor Brother's by a registered sale deed dated 16.2.1967. "the said properties are described morefully as schedule A and B to the writ peti...
Tag this Judgment!The Branch Manager National Insuiance Company Limited. Vs. Harthiveera ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. These who appeals have been filed by the Insurance Company praying that the impugned Judgment and Award dated 28 08 2008 made in MVC No.282/2006 c/w.MVC No.53/2007 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.)/Addl. MACT at Hiriyur, may be set aside. Cross-objection in MFA No.117/2009 is filed by the claimant in MVC No.53/2007 for enhancement of compensation. The cross objection in No.118/2009 is filed by the claimant in MVC No.282/2006 for enhancement of compensation. 2. Heard common arguments. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ Insurance Company submits that the driver of the autoriskshaw bearing No.KA-16/A-155 was not having valid driving licence to drive the autorickshaw. But the Tribunal erred in saddling the liability of the owner on the Insurance Company and also awarding exorbitant compensation in favour of the claimants. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/ claimants in MVC No.53/2007 and 282/2006 submits that the Tribunal is justified In saddling the liabil...
Tag this Judgment!Dileep Kumar Son of AppaswamygowdA. Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No,269/2010 of Moienarasipura Town Police Station, Hassan, for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 457, 376, 109 resd with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned High Court Government Pleader. 3. I have perused the FIR. The contents of the FIR discloses that Holenarasipura Police have registered a case in Crime No. 269/2010 against accused No.l-Dileep Kumar, accused No.2-Bhagya, for the offences punishable under Sections 417.. 457, 376, 109 read with Section 34 of Indian I Code on the complaint of one K.U.Nandini, aged 19 years. It is alieqed that complainant and accused No.l are known to each other. The accused promised the complainant to marry It is alieqed that complainant and accused No.l are known to each other. The accused promised the com...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Venkataswamy at Pillappa and ors Vs. Muninarayanappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14.09.2004 in R.A. No. 63/1999 passed by the Fast Track Court V at Chikkabalhiptira setting aside the judgment and decree dated 08.04.1999 hi OS No. 63/1985 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC. Chickballapur. 2. Father of appellants - Venkataswamy was the plaintiff and respondents are the defendants before the Trial Court. In this judgment for convenience the parties arc referred to their status before the trial Court. 3. The plaintiff and defendant No. I are the sons of defendant No. 2 through his first wife by name Nanjamma. Defendant Nos. 3 and 4 arc the sons of defendant No. 2 through second wife by name Muniyamma. In the year 1958 there came to be partition between plaintiff, defendant No. I and their mother on one side and defendant No, 2 his second while and defendant Nos. 3 and 4 on the otherside. Subsequently in the year 1977 there came to be a ealupaiti evidencing the earlier partition in...
Tag this Judgment!Ms. Chelpark Company (P) Ltd. Vs. Sri Christopher Dass and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
ORDER 1. Petitioner- a company incorporated under the Companies Act. carrying on business in textile processing, engaged the services of workmen, of whom the 1st respondent, was a workman from the year 1980 onwards. Petitioner having served a notice dt. 1/8/1989 of retrenchment of the respondent due to "chronic re-organization" called upon him to secure settlement of his dues, which when not accepted, led to filing a claim petition on 17/10/1989 invoking Sec.l0(4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for short the Act', registered as I.D.No.262/89 and thereafter as I.D.No.35/94. before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bangalore. Petitioner arraigned as 2nd party in the said proceedings, on notice, entered appearance through counsel, filed a counter statement denying the allegations and asserted closure of the industry. Labour Court, in the premise of pleadings of parties, framed 2 issues, one of which was, "Whether the closure of the factory with effect from 13/4/ 1990 is real a...
Tag this Judgment!Banashree Barman Do H Barman and ors. Vs. Bangalore University and ors ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
ORDER 1. Petitioners appeared for 7th semester examination in law which were held in the month of December 2010. The results were announced on 13.4.2011. Petitioners 1 and 3 herein viz., Banashree Barman and Bhavana G.K. have failed in one subject each and whereas petitioner Nos.2 and 4 viz., P.Praveen Kumar and A.Tarunakumari Devi have passed, but have scored less number of marks. However, all the four petitioners have applied for revaluation of certain papers. 2. Petitioners filed applications praying for photocopy of their respective answer sheets relating to certain subjects. All of them have applied in-between 15.4.2011 to 19.4.2011 as is clear from the document at Annexure- A' series. Petitioners 1, 2 and 4 were issued with the photocopies of the answer scripts in-Detween 4th May 2011 and 9th May 2011. The photocopies of answer scripts of 3rd petitioner are not issued at all. However, all of them have applied for revaluation. The said applications for revaluation were not accepte...
Tag this Judgment!Sri. Prabhulingappa H M. Son of MunichendragowdA. Vs. the Divisional C ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
ORDER 1. WP No. 10292/2010 is filed by the workman while WP No.7755/2010 by the Road Transport Corporation employer calling in question the award dated 31.10.2009 in Reference No. 14/2006 of the ill Addl. Labour Court. Bangalore. The challenge to the award by the workman is in so far as denying baokwages, continuity of service for promotion and increments, consequential benefits, increments, promotions and withholding four annual increments with cumulative effect, by modifying the order terminating his services from the Corporation. The Road Transport Corporation has challenged the very same award in so far as exercise of discretion under Sec. 11 -A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. for short Act, to modify the order of termination to one of reinstatement with certain benefits. 2. The workman when appointed as a Driver in the Public Road Transport Corporation produced a Transfer Certificate, certifying to have passed 7th standard from Government Higher Primary School. Mangasandra. ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesha Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
(Prayer: This Crl.A. is filed under Section 374(2) CR.P.C. by the Advocate for the Appellant against the Judgment dt.30.06.04 passed by the P.O., fast Track Court-I, Shimoga, in S.C.No.157/97 – convicting the appellant/accused No.1 for the offence P/U/S.304 R/W Sec.34 of IPC and etc.) 1. This appeal is filed by the accused challenging the judgment dated 30.06.2004 in S.C.No.157/1997, passed by the Fast Track Court -1, Shimoga convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 304 Part II r/w. Section 34 IPC and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for a period of 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine, to undergo S.I. for a period of 10 days. 2. The case of the prosecution is that accused Nos.1 to 3 on 06.09.1997 at about 3 p.m., in the land which is situated in survey No.36 of Keregadde Village, Thirthahalli Taluk, while grazing the Oxen in their land, took up a quarrel with CW.2 Shantha when she tried to tether the Oxen away from her land and at that ti...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Mahanteshwari and Others Vs. Union of India
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA, J: 1. Appellants filed a claim petition under Section 16 of the Railways Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’) before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) being the wife and children of one M.Anand, who died on 07.02.2007, while travelling as a passenger in train No.283 from R.Nulenur to Davanagere. The claim petition having been contested by the respondent, was dismissed, being aggrieved by which, the applicants have filed this appeal. 2. In the claim application it was stated that, the deceased was travelling from R.Nulenur to Davanagere by train No.283 on a valid ticket and being thirsty, to quench his thirst, was alighting from the train to drink the water at Kodaganur Railway Station, where he accidentally fell down and died at the spot. It was stated that, the cause of accident is due to the Railway Officer and the platform, which is at lower level, which made it very difficult for the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »