Karnataka Court September 2012 Judgments
Yogish M and Others Vs. the Registrar, Sir Visveshwaraiah Technologica ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-28-2012
(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.37429/2012 DATED 13/09/2012.) Vikramajit Sen, C.J. 1. These Appeals assail the Interim Order dated 03.09.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petitions Nos.30489/2012 connected with W.P. Nos. 28129-28228/2012. We shall decide the Appeals together with Writ Petition Nos.36565-37034/2012, which have been brought on our roster at the request of the learned counsel for the writ petitioners; their impleadment applications in the Appeals, stand withdrawn by them. 2. The prayers in the writ petitions Nos.28129-28228/2012 are for the issuance of Certiorari striking down the Visvesvaraya Technological University Autonomous College Statute 2006 [for brevity ‘VTUACS 2006’] framed under Section 48(A) of the VTU Act 1994 on the assertion that it is colourable and ultra vires and non est; a declaration that the ‘VTUACS 2006’ is disc...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Vidya Seetharam and Another Vs. Canara Bank Rep. by Its Chairman ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-27-2012
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions Are Filed Under Articles 226 And 227 Of the Constitution Of India, Praying To Quash the Action And Orders Passed By The Respondent Vide Annex-E DTD.22.2.12 And ETC.) 1. Petitioners have sought for quashing of communication dated 22.02.2012 addressed to the counsel for the petitioners, informing that the Voluntary Retirement under Special Scheme of the deceased husband of first petitioner is not accepted, as such, the petitioner are not entitled for terminal benefits under the Special Voluntary Scheme. Petitioner have also challenged Clause 7.7 of the Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme, Produced at Annexure- A. 2. It is not dispute that, the husband of the first petitioner was appointed as a clerk and thereafter he was promoted and ultimately he was a Senior Manger. While he was working as a Senior Manger, several Banks Introduced special voluntary scheme. Accordingly, even respondent- Bank also issued a Special Voluntary Scheme by issuing a communication ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammed Yousuf Javed Vs. the Ksrtc Central Office Though Its Managing ...
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Sep-27-2012
(This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari for quashing order of punishment dated 21.07.2012 passed by respondent no.2 which is at Annexure-F with all consequential benefits. This writ petition having heard and reserved, coming on for pronouncement of orders this day, the court made the following.) Petitioner has called in question order of punishment dated 21.07.2012 - Annexure-F passed by second respondent whereunder petitioner has been demoted from the post of Assistant Engineer (Grade-II) to Junior Engineer, Grade-III(Civil) with minimum Basic Pay and has ordered for recovery of Rs.1,58,585/- in 20 EMIs from salary of petitioner. 2 I have heard the arguments of Sri Vilas Kumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioner regarding maintainability of this writ petition since petitioner without exhausting alternate and efficacious remedy available under the Regulations governing service conditions of respon...
Tag this Judgment!Neelesh Vs. Uma
Court: Karnataka Gulbarga
Decided on: Sep-27-2012
(Prayer: This RPFC Is Filed U/S. 19(4) of The Fc Act, 1984 Against The Judgment Dated 27.03.2012 Passed In Crl. Misc. No.555/2011 On The File Of The Judge, Family Court At Bijapur. Dismissing The Petition Filed U/S. 126(2) Of Cr.P.C.) 1. This revision petition is taken up for disposal, though listed on the application in I.A.2/2012 for early hearing, after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondent respectively. 2. Revision petition under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short 'the Act') is directed against the order dated 27.03.2012 passed in Crl. Misc. No.555/2011 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Bijapur. 3. Under the impugned order, the learned Judge of the Family Court has dismissed the application filed by the revision petitioner under Section 126(2) of Cr.P.C., seeking for setting aside the earlier order passed by the very Court on 03.10.2011 in Crl. Misc. No.196/2011 awarding a maintenance in favour of the respondent to a ...
Tag this Judgment!K.C. Prabhakar Reddy Vs. State by Ashok Nagara Police Station Bangalor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition Is Filed Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. With A Prayer To Quash The Proceedings In PCR No. 19266/2011 On The File Of The Investigation Acmm, Bangalore And Etc.) 1. On 25.08.2011 respondent No.2 filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 465, 471, 506 and 420 IPC. The jurisdictional Magistrate recorded the sworn statement of respondent No.2, took cognizance of the offence and directed respondent NO.1 – police to investigate the matter. Now the jurisdictional police have registered a case against the petitioner in crime No.323/2011. Therefore the petitioner is before this Court to quash the proceedings. 2. Second respondent contend that she filed a civil suit in O.S.No.10743/1992 against Sreeramaiah and others for declaration of title, recovery of possession and permanent injunction. The subject matter of this suit is 30 guntas of land in Sy. Nos. 63/2, 112/3 and 115 situated Kowdenahalli vil...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnanugraha (a Unit of Sri Krishna Charitable Trust) Represented by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for records pertaining to the order Dated 21.4.2012 passed in Misc.Case No.25/2011 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Udupi District, Udupi Vide Annexure-A and Quash the order dated 21.4.2012 passed in Misc.Case No.25/2011 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Udupi District, Udupi Vide Annexure-A and etc.) 1. By the impugned order, the Court below has dismissed the Misc. cases filed by the petitioners herein praying for permission to adopt the childcren under Section 41 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act’ for brevity). Learned District Judge has proceeded on the basis that the Juvenile Justice Board has got jurisdiction for granting permission to adopt under the provisions of the Act and not the Court. While concluding so, the District Judge has relied upon the unamended provisi...
Tag this Judgment!H.B. Karibasamma Vs. Union of India by Ministry of Parliamentary Affai ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
(Prayer: THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO GRANT THE PETITIONER PERMISSION TO END HER LIFE AND TO DIRECT FORMATION OF A COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE TO INTELLIGIBLY AND HUMANELY LEGALIZE EUTHANASIA AND TO DECLARE SECTIONS 306 AND 309 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL INSOFAR AS IT CONCERNS TO THE PETITIONER.) I propose to commence the order with a quote from Mahatma Gandhi, which would read as under: "Some days back a calf having been maimed lay in agony in the ashram. Finally in all humility but with the clearest of convictions I got in my presence a doctor kindly to administer the calf a quietus by means of a poison injection. The whole thing was over in less than two minutes. The question may legitimately be put to me: Would I apply to human beings the principle I have enunciated in connection with the calf? Would I like it to be applied in my own case? My reply is 'Yes'; the same law holds ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sneha Vs. Vinayak
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
(The Petition is filed under S.24 of CPC, praying to order for transfer of MC 502/2012 before the III Addl. Family Court, Bangalore to III Addl. Sr.Civill Judge, Hubli in MC 49/2012.) Petitioner has sought for transfer of MC 502/2012 pending before the III Addl. Family Court at Bangalore to III Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Hubli to be tried along with MC 49/2012 pending there. Petitioner has married the respondent as per hindu rites and customs on 20.11.2008 at Vidyadiraj Kalyana Mantap at Hubli. It is stated, she is a housewife and the respondent is a practicing advocate in Bangalore. Expressing that she has undergone harassment and cruelty while living with the respondent, despite harassment and humiliation suffered by her, with a hope of improvement in life, she has chosen not to file a divorce petition but filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, she has filed MC 49/2012 before the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Hubli in that regard. The respondent has filed a petition for ...
Tag this Judgment!G. Dasappa Vs. State by Police Inspector
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
(Prayer: This Crl.A. is filed under S.374(2) Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant vide order dated 12.4.2010 passed by the Prl. Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, in Spl.C.(P.C.A.) No.1/2007 convicting the appellant/accused for the offence p/u/S.409 of IPC r/w 13(1)(c) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.) 1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction dated 12.04.2010 passed by the learned Principal Session Judge, Chitradurga in Special Case (P.C.A.) No.1/2007 convicting the accused under S.409 IPC r/w Ss.13 (1)(c) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’) and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 years and 2 months and pay fine amount of Rs. 50,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 9 months, by giving setoff to the period of detention already undergone. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, du...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Muninarasamma and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-24-2012
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 23.10.2010 in M.A.No.13/2007 passed by the learned judge of Fast Track Court – IV, Bangalore Rural District, produced at Annexure-A to the Writ Petition.) 1. The petition coming on for orders on the application seeking vacating the order of stay, the petition is heard for final disposal. 2. The facts of the case are as follows:- One Nagaiah was the Barawardar of Talavari Office and was entitled for grant of land on the abolition of Village Offices under the provisions of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (Hereinafter referred to as ‘the KVOA Act’, for brevity). He was granted land in Survey No.33 measuring 5 acres 30 guntas and the land in Survey No.20 measuring 21 guntas of Thimmegowdana Hosahalli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District. Nagaiah had three sons, Thimmarayappa, Giddappa and Byrappa. The genealogy of Nagaiah...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »