Karnataka Court August 2011 Judgments

Smt. Rama Gore, and anr. Vs. Sri. Rajesh Gore, and anr.

Court: Karnataka

1. The claimants in C.R. No. 52/2007 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Udupi have come up in this appeal impugning the order dated 30.05.2009, wherein their claim petition is dismissed. 2. Brief facts leading to these appeals are as under: -Claimant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased Shanker Gore. The first respondent Rajesh Gore is none other than the son of the claimants and also the brother of the decreased Shanker Gore. It is not in dispute that the first respondent is the owner of Mahindra and Mahindra Jeep bearing registration No. KA-33-M-42 and the said vehicle is insured with the second respondent-United India Insurance Company. The fact that the aforesaid jeep bearing No. KA-33-M-42 was driven by the deceased Shanker Gore on 21.09.2007. which met with an accident at about 6.30 p.m. on the said date, resulting in the death of Shanker Gore is not in dispute. It is further not in dispute that after his death his parents filed a claim petition a...

Divisional Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. S. Manohar Son ...

Court: Karnataka

1. Both the claimant/petitioner and the Insurance Company/2nd respondent, have filed these appeals, questioning an order/award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ('CWC for short), allowing the claim petition in part and directing the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount to the workman. 2. MFA 10497/2007 is by the petitioner and MFA 10997/2007 is by the Insurance Company. For convenience, the parties would be referred with reference to their rank in the claim petition filed before the CWC. 3. T.M.Ganeshan/ 1st respondent, was the owner of a bus bearing registration No.KA-16/4546 The petitioner was employed by the 1st respondent to work as a driver in the said bus. On 3.4.2005, when the petitioner was driving the vehicle, an accident occurred and he sustained injury, which arose out of and during the course of employment. After obtaining the treatment and finding permanent disability and loss of earning capacity, a claim petition was filed on...

V.K.V. Sarma Vs. Ms. Indra Sarma

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This CRL.RP filed U/S. 397 Cr.P.C. Praying to set aside the order dated 10.6.2010 passed in CRL.A.No. 674/2009, by the P.O. FTC-II, Bangalore City, Annexure-A. and order dated 21.7.2009, passed in CRL.MISC. No. 692/2007, by the III ADDL., CMM, Bangalore City, At Annexure-B.) 1. The petitioner is before this court aggrieved by the trial court allowing the application filed by the respondent u/s 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (‘the Act’ for short) and the said order of the trial court being confirmed by the lower appellate court. 2. The brief facts are, the respondent filed a petition u/s 12 of the Act and sought, among other things, a direction to the petitioner to pay her maintenance of Rs. 18,000/- per month and in the petition it was stated by her that, she had a live-in- relationship with the petitioner despite the petitioner having wife and two children and on account of the companionship the respondent had with the petitioner, p...

Smt. K. Pankaja Prabhudev @ Pankaja Prabhudev Vs. the Bangalore Develo ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012ILR(Kar)268; 2012(1)KantLJ241

(Prayer: This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the Respondent to transfer the Katha in Respect of Site No. 1774 in HBR Layout, 1st stage, V Block, Bangalore-43, Allotted in the name of her late Husband Sri. B.N.H. Prabhudev Vide Annexure-B.) 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, at the first instance has sought a direction to the respondent to transfer title in respect of site No. 1774 in HBR Layout, 1st stage, 5th Block, Bangalore – 43, allotted in the name of her husband Sri. B.N. Prabhudev to her name. Subsequently, an application has been made seeking quashing of order dated 11.5.2011 (Annexure-L). 2. The petitioner has averred since that her deceased husband had made an application to the respondent authority seeking allotment of a residential site in Bangalore. After necessary registration, her husband was allotted the aforementioned site. In fact, applications were invited for allotment of sites. It is stated that ...

State of Karnataka by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bangalore ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This petition filed under Section 23(1) of the KST Act, against the Judgment and order dated 12.07.2007, passed in STA.No.369/2006 on the file of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, Allowing the Appeal and modifying the appellate order passed by the FAA in CSTAP 30/2005-06 Dated 19.04.2006.) RAVIMALIMATH, J. 1. This petition is by the State being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal allowing the appeal by granting the benefit of reduction at 2% in the rate of CST to the assessee. 2. The assessee is engaged in the operation of a solvent extraction plant in Challakere and carries on the business of manufacture and sale of solvent extracted oil. By-products of de-oiled cake and de-oiled rice bran are obtained in the manufacturing process. The assessee sold sunflower de-oiled cake in course of inter state trade and produced C-Forms obtained from buying dealers in other States and claimed benefit of reduction in the rate of CST at 2% in terms of the Notification No.FD 11...

M/S. Giri Darshini Trading Co. Mysore, Rep. by Its Partners and Anothe ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012(2)KantLJ225

(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct respondents 2 and 3 not to mark sites or allot the same as per modified layout plan of ‘A’ Block, APMC Yard, Bandipalya, Mysore and more particularly not to allot site No.316 to any trader or applicant and etc.) 1. The petitioners are the licence traders functioning in the market yard of Bandipalya, APMC Yard, Mysore. The second respondent developed a market yard vide Annexure-G in the year 1999-2000. In respect of the area in ‘A’ block there was remodified layout plan vide Annexure-R1. The petitioners are the occupants of shop Nos.39 and 17 situated in ‘A’ block. In the original plan to the frontage of shop No.17 and the behind portion of shop Nos.39, 40, 41 the large area is shown as vacant. A high tension wire is running over the portion of the said vacant area. The 3rd respondent in fact had formed two sites in the said vacant area, and because o...

Kuru Eramma Vs. Santosh and Others

Court: Karnataka Gulbarga

Ramesh, J (Oral): Heard. Perused the impugned Order. By the impugned Order, the Trial Court has granted permission to respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein, who are minors to sue as indigent persons. 2. The sole contention urged by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Guardian/Mother of respondent Nos.1 and 2 has properties and therefore, the Trial Court ought to have taken note of the same while adjudicating the issue. 3. The Trial Court has negatived this contention by rightly relying on a Judgment of the Delhi High Court in Disha Sethi vs. Chander Mohan Sethi AIR 2008 Delhi 81. I am in respectful agreement with the view taken in the said Judgment. 4. In my opinion, the financial condition of the guardian or next friend or any other relative of the applicant is totally irrelevant and cannot be taken into consideration at all for the purpose of determining as to whether the applicant is an indigent person as defined in Order XXXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. 5. ...

K. Ajitkumar Gadiyar, Mangalore and Others Vs. Corporation Bank, Repre ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash (i)order dated 30.12.2005 (Annexure – H) and (ii) order dated 13.1.2006 (Annexure-H1) both issued by the respondent by issue of Writ in the nature of certiorari or appropriate Writ or direction and declare that the petitioners are entitled to be paid Ex-Gratia taking into account the revised salary for the month in which each of the petitioners was relieved from the service of the Bank on Voluntary Retirement and direct the respondent by issue of Writ in the nature of mandamus to pay each of the petitioner differential amount of Ex-Gratia calculated on the basis of revised salary together with interest at 12% per annum from 8th July 2005 till the date of payment.) 1. These petitions are heard and disposed of together, in view of the issue raised being the same. 2. The brief facts are as follows: The petitioners were erstwhile employees of the respondent – Bank and had retir...

Slate by Banashankari Police. Vs. Sidda Reddy Son of Nagi.

Court: Karnataka

1. Criminal Appeai No.45/2003 is by the State against the judgment of remand dated 19th September 2002 passed by the XXIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge. Bangalore City in Criminal Appeal No.39/1999, reversing the judgment in C.C.No.5353/1991 dated 12.2.1999 on the file of II Addl.CM.M.. Bangalore. 2. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1045/2002 is by the accused against the very same judgment. 3. Banashankari Police charge sheeted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC. 4. Case of the prosecution is that, accused is the owner of Sri.Siddamma Siddareddy Kalyana Mantapa situated at Papaiah Garden. Banashankari 3rd Stage Bangalore. On the date of incident, son of PWs-1 and 2 had left the house at about 9 a.m. and while playing, he came in contact with a fence, which has been connected to electricity and as a result of the said negligence by the accused, the victim succumbed to injuries (electrocuted). PW-1 and PW-2 got the information of the accident and th...

National Insurance Co. Ltd., Haveri Through Its Regional Office Vs. Ru ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This MFA. CROB. In MFA. 5685/07 is filed under order 41 Rule 22 of CPC against the Judgment and Award dated 17.2.2007 passed in MVC. 1002/99 on the file of Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-I and Member, Mact, Tumkur, Partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking Enhancement of Compensation.) 1. These appeals are by the Insurer questioning the liability whereas the cross-objections are filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of common judgment and award in MVC.Nos. 1002 to 1006/99 dated 17.2.2007 on the file of the MACT, Tumkur. 2. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 50,800/-, Rs. 17,000/-,Rs. 47,000/- Rs.9,600/- and Rs. 16,000/- respectively with interest. 3. The case of the claimants was that on 12.10.1999 they had loaded 58 bags of onion in a lorry bearing No.KA. 27-748 and along with the goods they were travelling in the same lorry to Bangalore. On its way to Bangalore, on account of rash and negligent driving by t...