Karnataka Court February 2014 Judgments
M/S. Comforts Tower Condominium Vs. the District Registrar and Dy. Com ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 Of The Constitution Of India, With A Prayer To Call For Records and Quashing The Endorsement Dt. 19.2.13, Passed By The R1, Ann-K; Quash The Clause N0.3(H) and (I) Of Ann-F, Dt. 1.1.13, and Clause No.4(C) Of Ann-G, Dt.1.1.13 And Direct The Rl To Take Action U/S.25 Of Karnataka Societies Registration Act With Regard To The Constitution Of The R2 Society To Cancel The Registrationc Certificate Ann-D.) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking that the endorsement dated 19.02 2013 (Annexure-K) be quashed and further to quash Clause No. 3 (h) and (i) of Annexure -F and also Clause No. 4 (c ) of Annexure - G. In addition, the petitioner is also seeking action to cancel the registration of the second respondent Society. 2. The brief facts are that there is an apartment known as 'Comfort Towers' situate opposite to Kalpana Theatre at Udupi. The 'flats' in the apartment block is purchased by several persons who are the owners...
Tag this Judgment!C. Jayaraj Vs. M/S. Innovative Property Management and Co. and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
(Prayer: This Petition Is Filed Under Section 11[5] Of The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 Praying To Appoint Justice Pathri Basavana Gouda, Former Judge Of High Court Of Karnataka As Sole Arbitrator To Adjudicate Upon The Contra Claims Between The Respondents And Petitioner In The Above Case; Etc.) 1. This petition under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [for short 'Act'], is instituted by a party to the Property Management and Services Agreements - Annexures-A, B and C of even date dated 25.8.2008. 1st respondent and 3rd respondent are signatories to the said agreement, while the 2nd respondent is the Signatory to the Memorandum of derstanding dated 5.11.2008 - Annexure-D, as between the 1st and 2nd respondent. 2. Petitioner submits that certain disputes having arisen in terms of the agreements - Annexures - A, B and C, led to legal notices and since there was no resolution of the disputes, notice dated 24.8.2010 Annexure-H, was issued nominating Sri. Ju...
Tag this Judgment!The Assistant Executive Engineer Vs. Senior Labour Inspector and Other ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 21.03.2013 passed by the Labour officer and Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, Sub Division-1, Bangalore as per Annexure-B, etc.) 1. The petitioner principal employer having engaged the services of contract employees through a contract and when arraigned as party respondent in a proceeding under Minimum Wages Act for short payment of wages to the contract employees, by the Contractor, suffered an order directing it to pay difference of wages and compensation. Hence the petition. 2. Although Sri. B.L. Sanjeev, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar such matters, this Court has taken a lenient view and exonerated the petitioner from payment of compensation, the submission is unacceptable. Section 21 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (for short the Act), is applicable to the petitioner, and being a principal e...
Tag this Judgment!R. Rangaswamy Vs. the Vice Chairman and Managing Director
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India Praying To Quash The Impugned Award Passed By The Iii Additional Labour Court In I.D.No. 28/07, Dt. 22.11.2010, Ann-A And Quash The Impugned Order Passed By The Court Below On Issue No.1 Holding That The Enquiry Conducted As Fair and Proper Vide Ann-M Dt. 24.6.2010 Etc.) 1. Petitioner, while discharging duties as Junior Assistant in the respondent “ Public Road Transport Corporation, is said to have committed certain acts of misconduct along with others, by which Rs.3,53,044/- was misappropriated. The disciplinary proceeding when commenced, domestic enquiry held, the Enquiry Officer submitted a report, holding charges proved, following which the Disciplinary Authority by order dated 17.8.2006, terminated the petitioner from service, with a direction to recover Rs.3,53,044/- from out of the gratuity payable by way of forfeiture. That order was subject matter of ID No.28/2007 before the III Add...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Power Gear Limited Vs. M/S. Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company L ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
(Prayer: This CMP is filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to allow the petition and appoint an arbitrator to decide the dispute between the parties.) 1. Petitioner and respondent-M/s Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company Limited ('GESCOM" for short) entered into a contract for establishing a substation at Bilwara village in Jewargi Taluk of Culbarga District on turnkey basis, pursuant to letter of intent dated 12.05.2005 and letter of acceptance dated 23.05.2005 as recorded in the communication dated 31.01.2006, Annexure-A. The terms relating to resolution of disputes and arbitration between the parties are at clauses 48 and 49 of the General Conditions of Contract, Annexure-C, as also, under clause 4.0 under the nomenclature, "Settlement of Dispute" in the Contract Agreement dated 18.07.2005, Annexure-D, making reference to clauses 48 and 49 of the general conditions of contract. 2. It appears that the respondent made payment on 18.09.2010 pur...
Tag this Judgment!S. Armugam Vs. the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
(This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for records and direct the respondents not to proceed against the petitioner in pursuance of notice issued by the 2nd respondent dated 20.01.2014 as per Annexure-C. This petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:) 1. Petitioner is an employee of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanaga^a Palike. A charge sheet was filed against the petitioner in Special C.C.No.6/2006 on the file of the Special Judge, Bangalore Urban District, Bangalore City. After the trial, the petitioner was found guilty. Petitioner was convicted anu was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of one year and pay fine of ?10,000/- and in default, to undergo further SI for a period of six months for the offences punishable under Ss.l3(l)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'). Crl.A.No.670/2011 has been filed by the petitioner against the said Judgment of convicti...
Tag this Judgment!A. Sandhya Sudhakaran and Others Vs. M/S. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-10-2014
(Prayer: This MFA is filed U/'S 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated: 12/03/2010 passed in MVC No. 95/2004 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.) (Prayer: This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated: 12/03/2010 passed in MVC No. 95/2004 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, awarding a compensation of Rs.4,39,000/'- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.) (Prayer: This Misc. Cvl. is filed under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC R/w. Section 169 of M.V. Act 1988, praying to stay the operation of the judgment and award dated 12/03/2010 in MVC No.95/2004 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore ...
Tag this Judgment!Parvathamma Vs. Shivakumar @ Shivanna and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-10-2014
(Prayer: This R.S.A Is Filed Under Section 100 Of CPC Against The Judgment And Decree Dated 29.03,2006 Passed In R.A.No.514/2004 (Old No. 19/1997) On The File Of The Prl.District Judge, Tumkur, Allowing The Appeal And Set Asiding The Judgment And Decree Dated 13.03.1997 Passed In O.S.No.277/1989 On The File Of The Prl.Munsiff And Jmfc., Tumkur.) 1. This appeal by the plaintiff in O.S.No.277/1989 on the file of the then Principal Munsiff and JMFC, Tumkur is directed against the divergent judgment dated 29.03.2006 passed by the Principal District Judge, Tumkur in R.A.No.514/2004 allowing the said appeal filed by the respondent-defendants by setting aside the judgment and decree dated 13.03.1997, passed by the Trial Court in the aforesaid suit decreeing the said suit and consequently, dismissing the suit filed by her for declaration. 2. During the course of this judgment, the parties herein would be referred to with reference to their ranking in the trial Court. 3. Plaintiff filed the sui...
Tag this Judgment!Vajravathi, W/O Hirachancl Kutte, and Others Netra, W/O Nagaraj
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Feb-06-2014
(Prayer: This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 13.04.2011 passed by the Hon'ble Lok Adalat in O.S.No.28/2010 vide Annexure-D and the final decree dated 23.04.2011 passed in O.S.No.28/2010 vide Annexure-E. 1. This writ petition is filed challenging the award passed by the Lok Adalat on the ground that in the so-called compromise entered into before Lok Adalat, the petitioners have not been allotted any share in the schedule property though each one of them had l/4th share in it. 2. The material on record discloses that one Manikchand Bhadaie and his son Nagaraj Bhadaie constituted a Hindu undivided family. Nagaraj Bhadaie had two daughters. Manikchand Bhadaie also had two daughters. Manikchand Bhadaie and his son Nagaraj Bhadaie are dead. The suit is filed by the widow and children of Nagaraj Bhadaie against the wife of Manikchand Bhadaie and her two daughters for partition and separate possession of their legitim...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Udupi Power Corporation Limited M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Limi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-2014
(These writ petitions are filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india, with a prayer to quash impugned order dated 24.06.2013 made in i'.a. no.i in as nos. 40/2011, 42/2011, 43/2011, 41/2011 respectively on the court of the vi additional city civil and sessions judge, bangalore as highly arbitrary, illegal and without authority of law vide annexure-a and etc. these writ petitions having been reserved for orders, coming on for pronouncement this day, the court pronounced the following :) 1. The parties to all these petitions are common . The petitioner in W,P.No.37279/2013 is also the petitioner in W.P.Nos.37280, 37231 and 37282/2013 and is assailing the separate orders, all dated 24.06.2013 passed respectively in A.S. Nos.40, 41, 42 and 43/2011, by the VI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City. By the said orders, the respective applications filed by the petitioner herein who is also the petitioner before the Court below have been rejected. Since common q...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »