Karnataka Court January 2014 Judgments
H.N. Nagaveni Vs. Assistant Commissioner and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-2014
(This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the circular dated 22.1.2014 at Annexure-D issued by the 3rd respondent by declaring the same is illegal and arbitrary. This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following) 1. The petitioner was elected on 17.12.2012, as Adhyaksha of Paiagatti Grama Panchayat (for short 'the Panchayat'), Jagalur Taluk, Davangere District. 15 members of the Panchayat had presented a notice dated 21.12.2013, in Form-I, under Rule 3(1) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No-Confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994 (for short 'the Rules'). The 1st respondent gave notice dated 23.12.2013, in Form-II, under Rule 3(2), to the members, including Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of the Panchayat, fixing the date as13.01.2014, for moving 'No-Confidence Motion'. The 1st respondent having read out to the members of the Panchayat, the Motion, for consideration of...
Tag this Judgment!Shankarappa and Others Vs. the Cooperative Election Commission, Karnat ...
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jan-31-2014
(Prayer: These writ appeals are filed u/s. 4 of the karnataka high court act, 1961, and rule 27 of the writ proceedings rules. praying to, set-aside the order passed by the learned single judge in w.p.no. 100765-100769/2014 and 100802-804/14 dated 29.01.2014 and allow the writ petition filed by the petitioners granting reliefs claimed therein. 1. These Writ Appeals are filed against the order passed by the learned single Judge dismissing the Writ Petitions and holding that the amendment to Section 28A(4) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 which came into effect from 11.2.2013 which prescribe the term of office of the members of the committee shall be 5 co-operative yea's is only prospective in nature and it has DO retrospective operation. 2. The appellants are the Board of members of the fourth respondent society. It is registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). They were declared as e...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadevi and Another Vs. Kenchavva and Others
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jan-31-2014
(Prayer: This Wp Is Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India Praying To Set Aside The Order Dated: 14/08/2009 Vide Annexure-C Passed By The Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Din!.) Gokak In Lok Adalat And Consequential Final Decree Dated:03/10/2009 Vide Annexure-D As A Null And Void.) 1. This writ petition is filed challenging the award passed by the Lok Adalath. 2. The plaintiff”Kenchavva, who is the wife of defendant No.5, filed a suit claiming her l/7th share in the deceased son ”Dundappa's service benefits. She arrayed her daughter-in-law as defendant No.l and grand-children as defendant Nos.2, 3, 4 and 6. Defendant No.7 was the Life Insurance Corporation and defendant No.8 was the Regional Fire Fighter Officer, where the deceased was employed. 3. Her grievance was her son”Dundappa had insured his life for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-, Rs.50,000/-, Rs.50,000/- Rs.50,000/- and Rs.50,000/- under different L.I.C. polices. Defendant Nos.1 to 6 colluding with each...
Tag this Judgment!Thyagaraj Vs. Siddamma and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
(Prayer: These Miscellaneous First Appeals is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated:31.10.2009 passed in MVC Nos.231/2008 and 265/2008 respectively, on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and MACT, Harihar, awarding a compensation of Rs.2,59,000/- and Rs.20,000/- respectively, with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.) 1. These appeals are preferred challenging the common judgment and award dated 31.10.2009 passed in MVC No.231/2008 and MVC No.265/2008 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and Addl. MACT, Harihar. 2. It is the case of the claimant that on 28.08.2007 while the son of petitioner in MVC No.231/2008 along with others was going in the bullock cart belonging to the petitioner in MVC No.265/2008 near Bannikodu cross on Harihar - Shimoga Road, Harihar, the car bearing registration No.KA-i4/M-5878 being driven by its driver in rash manner, came from Harihar side with high speed and dashed against the bullock cart...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Nizam Ali Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
(Prayer: This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the show cause notice dated 19.4.2012 vide Annexure-A issued by 2nd respondent and quash the Official Memorandum dated 19.4.2012 vide Annexure-B issued by 2"u respondent.) 1. A short question raised in this writ petition is as to whether the Chief Executive Officer, Karnataka State Board of Wakfs (for short 'the Board') has the authority to suspend the petitioner? 2. The short facts are that, pursuant to an order dated 25.01.2010 of the Board, the petitioner was appointed as Vice Chairman of Hazrath Tipu Sultan Shaheed Wakf Development Committee, Ganjam, Srirangapatna. Complaints having been received against the petitioner and an audit report also having been received on 31.03.2012, showing certain deficiencies, the Chief Executive Officer of the Board/2nd respondent, ordered suspension of the petitioner with reference to the power under sub-S.(5) of S.64 of the Wakfs Act, 1995 (fo...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Sankar Mirjankar Vs. Vasantalata Koivi Vimalanand Mirjankar
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
(This RFA is filed u/s 96 of cpc against the judgment and decree dt. 15.10.03 passed in o.s.no.39/90 on the file of the civil judge (sr. dn.), sirsi, dismissing the suit for declaration, partition and possession. this appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court delivered the following:) 1. Plaintiff of an original suit bearing O.S.No.39/1990, which was pending on the file of the Court of Ci/il Judge (Sr.Dn.), Sirsi has approached this Court by filing an appeal under Section 96 of CPC. Respondents herein were defendants in the vsaid suit. Parties will be referred as plaintiffs and defendants 1 to 7 as per their ranking in the trial Court. 2. Plaintiff had filed a suit for the reliefs of declaration to the effect that he has become the owner to an extent of Vo. share in the suit schedule properties, on the basis of settlement deed executed by Mangesh Rao in favour of his paternal grand mother Ganga Bai on 09.08.1939 and for consequential relief of partition and separate posses...
Tag this Judgment!Sri H. Udayasham Kar Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
(This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 And 227 Of The Constitution Of India, Praying To Direct The Respondents To Release The Balance Bill Amount Of ?19,18,781/ For The Contract Work Carried Out Under The Scheme H.A.No.3054 Roads and Bridges (Non-Plan) Special Repairs For The Year 2000-01 To 2003-04. This Petition Coming On For Preliminary Hearing This Day, The Court Made The Following:) 1. The petitioner is a Class-I PWD Contractor. He has filed this writ petition, to issue a writ of mandamus and direct the respondents to pay the balance bill amount of ?19,18,781/- for the work executed by him. 2. Sri K.T. Gurudeva Prasad, learned advocate, contended that the respondents have no right to retain the balance bill amount towards contract work executed by the petitioner i.e., for construction of roads and bridges as per the Scheme H/A No.3054 for the years 2000-01 to 2003-04, even after final bill submitted by the petitioner was accepted. He submitted that despite submission of r...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Sankar Mirjankar Vs. Vasantalata Koivi Vimalanand Mirjankar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
(This RFA is filed u/s 96 of cpc against the judgment and decree dt. 15.10.03 passed in o.s.no.39/90 on the file of the civil judge (sr. dn.), sirsi, dismissing the suit for declaration, partition and possession. this appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court delivered the following:) 1. Plaintiff of an original suit bearing O.S.No.39/1990, which was pending on the file of the Court of Ci/il Judge (Sr.Dn.), Sirsi has approached this Court by filing an appeal under Section 96 of CPC. Respondents herein were defendants in the vsaid suit. Parties will be referred as plaintiffs and defendants 1 to 7 as per their ranking in the trial Court. 2. Plaintiff had filed a suit for the reliefs of declaration to the effect that he has become the owner to an extent of Vo. share in the suit schedule properties, on the basis of settlement deed executed by Mangesh Rao in favour of his paternal grand mother Ganga Bai on 09.08.1939 and for consequential relief of partition and separate posses...
Tag this Judgment!Kingfisher Airlines Limited Vs. State Bank of India and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-29-2014
(This Osa Filed U/S 483 Of The Companies Act, 1956 R/W Section 4 Of The Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, Praying To Call For The Records Pertaining To Company Application No.2214/2013 In Co.P.No.164/2013 and Etc., This Osa Coming On For Final Hearing, Having Reserved For Orders, This Day, Pronounced The Following:) (Dilip B. Bhosale J.) 1. This Original Side Appeal is directed against the order dated 11th December 2013 passed by the learned single Judge whereby Company Application No.2214/13 in CO.P.No.164/2013 has been dismissed. Company Application was filed by the appellant-company under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 443 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short "the Act") and Rules 6 ana 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 seeking direction to the respondents-banks and/or the SBICAP Trustee Company Limited (for short "SBICAP-Trustee") not to prosecute Miscellaneous Application No.342 of 2013 further, filed by them under Section 14 of the Securitis...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Beml Limited Vs. Shri S. Naveen, and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-29-2014
(This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, dated 29.09.2012 passed in SI. Application No.21/2009 under which it has dismissed the application filed u/S 33(2)(b), so far as issue No.3 is concerned which is at Annexure-A which is arbitrary, capricious, irrational and unjust. These writ petitions coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:) 1. Since common questions of law and that of facts arise for decision making, with the consent of learned counsel for parties, petitions are clubbed together, heard finally and disposed of by this common order. 2. W.P.No. 11191/2013 and W.P.No. 11192/2013 are filed by the management of BEML calling in question the orders of even date 29tTi September 2012 of the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, dismissing Serial Application No.22/2009 arid Serial Application No.21/2009 respectively, filed under Section 33(2)(b) of t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »