Karnataka Court October 2012 Judgments
Smt. Shyamalatha Singh Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral: Vikramajit Sen, CJ. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Rightly, there is no opposition to the condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Additional document Annexure "Q" is also taken on record. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner/appellant was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 25/07/1990 and as per letter dated 25/01/1991 against a permanent post in which a vacancy had arisen due to resignation. The said letter dated 25/01/1991 also approves the appointment with effect from the said date. As a consequence, unless the Teacher fails to discharge her duties, or if transferred to another Institution, fails to report for duty to that Institution, it is the responsibility of the State to pay salaries. The Commissioner, Public Instructions Department, Bangalore, has articulated this very position in the letter dated 30/09/2009 (Annexure "Q"), authored by the Under Secretary, Education Department, attached to the Commissioner, Public Instructions Depart...
Tag this Judgment!Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation and Another Vs. Mujahid A ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-10-2012
(Prayer: This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated: 02/06/2007 passed in MVC No. 3939/2006 on the file of the V Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mayohall Unit, Bangalore (SCCH-20), awarding a compensation of Rs. 4,74,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment.) 1. These two appeals respectively by the Corporation and the injured claimant are directed against the same judgment and award dated 2ndJune 2007, passed in MVC No.3939/2006, by the V Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mayohall Unit, Bangalore (SCCH-20), (for short, ‘Tribunal’). While the Corporations has filed the appeal for reduction of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 4,74,000/- with 6% interest per annum, awarded in favour of the claimant is on the higher side, the injured claimant has filed the appeal seeking enhancement of compensation on the ground that the compensation of Rs. 4,74,000/- awarded by Tribunal i...
Tag this Judgment!Tara Ajai Singh Vs. R.P. Sharma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-10-2012
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 CR.P.C. By The Advocate For the Petitioner Praying That To Set Aside the Impugned Order Dated 03.08.11 In C.C.No 27030/11 On the File Of The VIII ACMM, Bangalore Vide Annexure-A) 1. In this petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 3.8.2011 in C.C.No.27030/2011 passed by the VIII Addl.Chief Metropolitian Magistrate, Bangalore registering the case against the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 500 IPC and issuing summons. 2. Petitioner is an IAS officer and retired as Principal Secretary, Department of personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Karnataka. Respondent is senior IPS Officer, presently working as Inspector General of the Police (Planning and modernization). Petitioner while working as principal secretary to the Government, wrote a letter on 09.02.2007 to the then Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka. The Relevant portion of this letter for the purpose of this case ...
Tag this Judgment!Umla Vs. the State of Karnataka Through Ratkal P.S.
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Oct-09-2012
(Prayer: This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the Advocate For the petitioner praying to release the accused/petitioner on bail in crime No.23/2012 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq. Chincholi, Dist. Gulbarga In S.C.No.347/2012, which is registered for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC and under Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act.) 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the advocate for the petitioner praying to release the accused/petitioner on bail in Crime No.23/2012 of Ratkal Police Station, Chincholi - Tq., Gulbarga - District in S.C.No.347/2012, which is registered for the offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner as well as the learned High Court Government Pleader. 3. I have perused the statement of objections filed by the learned High Court Government Pleader and the FIR found in the records. 4. The contents of F...
Tag this Judgment!Shabbir and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka Through Manvi Police Sta ...
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Oct-09-2012
(Prayer: This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the Advocate For the petitioners praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in crime No.74/2012, registered by Manvi Police, Dist. Raichur, for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 302 IPC (Now Pending In C.C.No.624/2012 on the file of Civil Judge Junior Division and JMFC Manvi).) 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the advocate for the petitioner praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.74/2012, registered by Manvi Police, Raichur Dist., for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 302 of Indian Penal Code. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State. I have perused the FIR found in the records. 3. The contents of FIR discloses that Manvi Police have registered a case in Crime No.74/2012 against accused Nos.1 to 10 for th...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Super Sales Corporation and Others Vs. the Debt Recovery Tribunal ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-2012
(Prayer: THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY R-4 DT.25-3-2003 VIDE ANN. Q.) NAGARATHNA J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 25.03.2003 passed in M.A.No.55/2003 (Annexure-Q) by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘DRAT’ for the sake of convenience). By the said order DRAT directed the respondent-Bank to receive the balance amount of Rs.63.00 lakh and release the title deeds related to the scheduled property to the 3rd respondent-institution which was to discharge the entire amount due to the Bank. The 3rd respondent-institution was directed to deposit before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter, referred to as "DRT"), at Bangalore, a sum of Rs.20.00 lakh due to the borrower within two weeks from the date of the impugned order with a further direction to the Presiding Officer DRT to return the said amount to the borrower i.e., the p...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Bhagylakshmi Radhakrishna Holla and Others Vs. State of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-2012
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions are Filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India Praying to Declare the impugned part A-8 to the Schedule of The Act as inserted by The Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation (Amendment) Act, 2012 and Subsequently by The Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation (Second Amendment) Act, 2012 as null and void, as Violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and therefore ultra vires the constitution of India.) H.G. Ramesh, J. Oral: In these writ petitions, the petitioners who are owners of motor cabs are challenging the constitutional validity of Karnataka Act Nos. 14 of 2012 and 29 of 2012 (‘the amending Acts’ for short) amending the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 (‘the Act’ for short). The effect of both the amendments is, with effect from 1st April 2012, lifetime tax shall be leviable on motor cabs, the cost of which exceeds Rupees fifteen lakhs, at the rates specified in Part-A8 of the Schedule of the Act. The lifetime tax ...
Tag this Judgment!The State Represented by Sub-inspector of Police Vs. Mohammed Sadiq an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-2012
(Prayer: This Crl.A. is filed under Section 378(1) and (3) Cr.P.C. praying to grant leave to file an appeal against the judgment dated 23.01.2006 passed by the JMFC-II court, mangalore, D.K. in C.C. No.5785/ 2004 acquitting the respondent/ accused for the offences punishable under section 8(c) read with 20 (b) of NDPS act,1985.) 1. The state has challenged the judgment and order of acquittal of the respondents for the charge under Section 8 (c) read with Section 20 (b) of NDPS Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act for short) on a trial held by JMFC, Mangalore. 2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this appeal are as under: On 16.07.2004 at about 10.30 a.m., the police received a credible information that few persons were in illegal possession of Ganja and therefore they proceeded to Kulai Gudde alongwith the officials, attesting witness and the gazette officer and on search found 145 grams of Ganja with the first respondent. The search of the accused was in the presen...
Tag this Judgment!G. Eshwaraiah and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Secretary t ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
(Prayer: These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash Annexure-B and B1 dated 29.11.2008 and notification dated 27.05.2010 vide Annexure-F issued by respondents.) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for issue of writ of certiorari and quash the notifications dated 29.11.2008 (Annexure-B and B-1) and the notification dated 27.05.2010 (Annexure-F). By the said notifications, the area wherein the petitioners' land is situate has been declared the Industrial Area under Section 3(1) and the lands belonging to the petitioners has been notified for acquisition under Section 28 (1) and Section 28 (4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act (KIAD Act for Short) by the State Government for the benefit of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB for Short) for formation of the Somapur Industrial Area. 2. The case of the petitioners is that they are brothers and are the absolute owners of the agricultural...
Tag this Judgment!Nanjaiah and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka By: Nagamangala P.S., N ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
(This Crl.A. filed U/S. 374 (2) Cr.P.C by the Advocate for the Appellants praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to set aside the Judgment of conviction sentence dated 12.01.2009 passed by the sessions Judge, fast track Court-I, Mandya in S.C.No.39/2000- convicting the appellants/accused No.3 to 5 for the offence P/U/S.143, 144, 148, 342, 302 and 506 R/W 149 of IPC. The appellants/Accused No.3 to 5 are sentenced to undergo R.I for 3 Months for the offence P/U/S. 143 R/W 149 IPC and further they are sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6 months for the offence P/U/S.144 R/W 149 IPC and further they are sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year for the offence P/U/S.148 R/W IPC of IPC and further they are sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 months for the offence P/U/S.342 R/W 149 IPC of IPC and further they are sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 months for the offence P/U/S.506 R/W 149 of IPC and further they are sentenced to undergo life Imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in d...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »