Karnataka Court September 2011 Judgments

Munishamappa and Others Vs. Chikkalagumaiah and Another

Court: Karnataka

Order on Memo Dated 08.09.2011 Patil, J. This memo is filed by the learned counsel for the appellants stating that, appellants have not paid any court fee before the Trial Court as the reference was pertaining to apportionment of compensation under Section 30 and 31 of Land Acquisition Act and not under Section 18 of the said Act and therefore, they need not pay any court fee under section 49 of the KCF and SV Act. Further, he submitted that, as per the said section, the appellants have to pay the court fee on the memorandum of appeal whatever the court fee paid at the first instance of the Court, since the appellants have not paid any court fee before the first instance Court, they need not pay any court fee, however, the court fee of Rs.20/- paid as per Schedule II, Article 3(ii)(1)(a) of the KCF and SV Act. 2. Further, learned counsel for the appellant has stated in the memo that, claimant Nos.2, 5, 6 and 7 also claimed the compensation and the same was dismissed. The claimant Nos. ...

M/S. Apna Car, Com Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S. Automart India Ltd.

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This MFA filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of CPC, against the order dated 3-1-2008 passed in IA No.1 in OS No.8734 of 2007 on the file of XI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, CCH NO.8, dismissing IA No.1 Under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC r/w Section 151 CPC for T.I.) 1. This is a plaintiff’s appeal against the order of the trial Court refusing to grant order of temporary injunction. 2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit. 3. The plaintiff M/s APNA CAR.COM PRIVATE LIMITED is as registered company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 on 17th September, 2000. The plaintiff is in the business of providing its customers a hassle free buying experience by creating an interactive market channel for efficient networking among buyers, sellers, dealers and manufacturers in the Indian Market. In this regard ‘apnacar.com’ introduced by the plaintiff on 11.12.19999 is a...

North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Vijayalaxmi a ...

Court: Karnataka

N. Kumar, J. ORDER ON REFERENCE This appeal is listed before us to consider the following questions namely: (i) Whether a passenger who travels on the roof-top of the bus meets with an accident and on account of that earlier he sustains injuries or dies in such an accident, could it be held that there is a contributory negligence on his part for such an accident and if it is held that there is the extent of contributory negligence on the part of the passenger and the driver and conductor of the bus who were conducting the bus? (ii) Whether the view taken by the two Division Benches of this court in the case of Mayamma (supra) and Shivaleela (supra) is the correct view or whether the decision of the Division Bench in the case of Sunanda (supra) is the correct view or any other view fixing different percentage of contributory negligence on the driver or the conductor or the passenger is required to be taken?” 2. This is a Corporations appeal. The claimants are wife and children of ...

C.R. Shivananda and Another Vs. H.C. Gurusiddappa and Others

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This RFA filed under Section 96 and Order 41 Rule I of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 28-5-2001 passed in OS No.1/1991 on the file of the Prl. District Judge, Chickmagalur, decreeing the suit for possession and appointment of trustee. 1. These two regular first appeals are filed by defendants 2 and 3 and defendants-5 and 6 in the suit, against the judgment and decree of the trial Court, which has decreed the suit of the plaintiffs, removing second and third defendants from constructive trusteeship, directing them to deliver possession of the property to the first defendant and appointing the first defendant as the sole trustee. 2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit. 3. The suit schedule property consists of three items, all situated in Chickmagalur Town. Item No.1 is known as ‘Uppali Mutt’, item No.2 is known as ‘Hosmutt’ and item No.3 is ‘Karisiddeswar Mutt’. 4...

Siemens Information Processing Services Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore, Rep. by I ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012(1)KCCR66; 2012(2)KantLJ558

(Prayer: This Company Petition is filed u/s.391 and 394 of the Companies Act (Act 1 of 1956) praying to sanction the scheme of amalgamation so as to be binding on all equity shareholders and creditors of the petitioner so also on the petitioner and all other concerned and that pursuant to the scheme becoming effective. The petitioner stand dissolved without being wound up as of the appointed date and etc.,) 1. Heard Sri. S. Vijayashankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioner, Sriyuths K.S. Mahadevan and V. Jayaram appearing for Official Liquidator and Sri. K. Nagaeshwarappa, Central Government Counsel appearing for Regional Director and perused the petition, Annexures filed thereto, Affidavit of Registrar of Companies, Report of Official Liquidator and reply affidavits filed thereto. 2. Petitioner is second transferor company and in this Company Petition sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation appended to the petition as per Annexure G1 is sought for. Petitioner Company was i...

Ritesh P. AmIn Vs. the Registrar General High Court of Karnataka Banga ...

Court: Karnataka

(This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground.) Mother of the petitioner, Smt.K. Shamba (for short ‘the deceased’) was working as a Sheristedar in the Court of Civil Judge, Mangalore. While she was working on deputation basis w.e.f. 14.10.1986, in the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘the Tribunal’), expired on 17.05.1987. At the time of her death, petitioner was a minor. After attaining the age of 18 years, having passed SSLC, petitioner submitted a representation to the Tribunal, for appointment on compassionate ground, which was forwarded on 22.09.2000, for further action, to the Registrar General of High Court of Karnataka. Service particulars of Smt. Shamba having been called for by the 1st respondent, the District Judge, D.K. Mangalore on 16.12.2000, requested the Registrar of the Tribunal, t...

L Krishnoji Rao Rep by Gpa Holder C. Annaiah Vs. Agarbathi Workers Hou ...

Court: Karnataka

Prayer: This RFA filed under section 96 of CPC against the judgment and award dated 11-4-2000 passed in OS No.5540/1990 by the XI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, decreeing the suit for permanent injunction.) 1. These two regular first appeals are filed by the tenth defendant in O.S. No.3341/1992 challenging the common judgment but separate decrees passed in O.S.No.3341/1992 and O.S.No.5540/1990, both of which are decreed. O.S.No. 5540/1990 is a suit filed for a bare injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property claiming right to the property under an agreement of sale dated 24.11.1985. The suit O.S. No. 3341/1992 is a suit filed for specific performance of the said agreement dated 24.11.1985. As per order on I.A.No.VII dated 18.2.1998, O.S. No. 5540/1990 was clubbed with O.S. No. 3341/1992. By the impugned judgment, the trial Court has disposed of both the suits, decreeing t...

The Divisional Manager, the New India Assurance Co., Ltd., Rep. by Its ...

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: This MFA is filed U/s 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated: 13/12/2007 passed in MVC No.396/2005 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Holalkere, awarding compensation of Rs.3,02,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till deposit.)                      1. The appeal by the Insurer and the cross objection by the claimants cross objectors are respectively directed against the same judgment and award dated 13th December 2007, passed in M.V.C.No.396/2005, by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Holalkere, (for short, “Tribunal”). 2. While the Insurer has filed the appeal seeking to set aside the liability fastened on it and for reduction of compensation, on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by Tribunal is on the higher side, the claimants cr...

Sri.Yarath Basheer Son of Haji MoosA. Vs. the Slate of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

JUDGMENT 1. The appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'accused No. 1 has filed this appeal against the judgment of conviction for an offence punishable under section 302 IPC) Accused No. 1 and accused 3 & 4 were tried for offences, punishable under sections 302, 114, 506-11 r/w 34 IPC in S.C.No.72/2005. on the file of Fast. Track Court, Kodagu at Madikeri. Accused No.2 was absconding. Accused No.2 could not be secured before the committal court. Therefore, the case against accused no.2 was separated. Accused 3 & 4 were acquitted for offences punishable under sections 302 c/w 114 & 506-11 r/w 34 IPC. the State has not. filed any appeal against the judgment of acquittal of accused 3 & 4. 2. We Have heard Sri A.H.Bhagavan, learned counsel for accused No.l and Sri N.S.Sampangiramaiah. learned IICGP for State. We have been taken through evidence and the impugned judgment. 3. In view of the fact that judgment of acquittal of accused 3 & 4 has attained finality, in this ap...

State of Karnataka and ors. Vs. S Madhuchand and anr.

Court: Karnataka

TH1S 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.25447/2010(S-RES) DATED 16/08/2010.This appeal coming on for preliminary hearing along with Misc.W.12252/10 this day, SABHAHIT, J. delivered the following:Judgment1. This appeal is filed by the state being aggrieved by the order dated 16.8.2010 passed in W.P.No.25447/10 wherein the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition by directing that the services rendered in the Institution-Respondent So,4 in the writ petition, prior to admission of the Institution for grant should also be considered for the purpose of fixation of pay-scales s seniority and all other consequential benefits following the judgment of this Court in V.T.S. JEYABAL VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS disposed of 13.10.2006.2. Similar appeals wherein identical orders have been passed by the learned Single Judge holding that the period rendered in the Private Education institution prior ...