Karnataka Court March 2014 Judgments
A. Balasubraman and Another Vs. the Authorised Officer and Superintend ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
(Prayer: This Crl.Rp Is Filed U/S.397 R/W 401 Cr.P.O Praying To Set Aside The Order Passed By The Tv Addl. City Civil And S.J, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore In Crl.A No. 15108/06, Vide Order Dt. 19.11.07 And Also Set Aside The Confiscation Order Passed By The Authorised Officer And Superintendent Of Excise Bangalore Urban, K.R.Circle, Bangalore In Ex.Pet.No. 179/04, Vide Order, Dt.22.03.06; Pertaining To The Confiscation Of Ambasador Car Bearing Reg.No.Ka-03-Ma-373 And Maruthi Suzuki 800 Car Bearing Reg.No. Ka 03-P-9859, Kindly Order To Release The Afore Mentioned Vehicles To The Final And Absolute Custody Of The Gpa Holder Of Petitioner.) 1. This Criminal Revision Petition under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C. is preferred against an order of confiscation of the vehicles belonging to the petitioners by the Authorised Officer and Superintendent of Excise, Indiranagar, Bangalore in Ex.P.No. 179/2004, dated 22.08.2006 which has been confirmed by the IV Additional City Civil and Sessio...
Tag this Judgment!S.S. Raghavendra and Another Vs. Parvathi Bai
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
(Prayer: This Crl.Rp Is Filed U/S.397 Cr.P.C Praying To Set Aside The Order Dated 30.8.08 Passed By The Addl. District And Sessions Judge, Shimoga In Crl.R.P.No.146/07 And Restore The Order Dated 3.9.07 Passed By The Ii Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and Jmfc., Shimoga In C.C.No.61/01.) 1. This Criminal Revision Petition under Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C. is directed against an order dated 30.08.2008 in Criminal Revision Petition No.146/2007 on the file of Additional District and Sessions Judge at Shimoga. 2. The brief facts which gave rise to this revision petition are as under: The revision petitioners were accused Nos.1 and 2 and respondent was the complainant before the Magistrate. The Complainant filed a private complaint against the accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 405, 406, 467, 468, 415, 417, 420 r/w Section 34 of IPC before the II Additional Civil Judge, (Junior Division) and JMFC at Shimoga. The Magistrate referred the complaint to the jurisdictional po...
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition Is Filed Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Praying To Quash The Proceedings In C.C. No.25/2010 On The File Of Prl. C.J. (Jr.Dn.) and Jmfc., Kolar.) 1. Petitioner-the New India Assurance Company Ltd., has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceeding in C.C.No.25/2010 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Junior Division and JMFC, Kolar. One J.V. Srinivas fell down from a bike on 25.10.2009 at about 11.00 am near Beechagondahalli gate, near Kaiwara, Kolar District. It was a case of self fall from the bike. One J.V. Narayanaswamy, the brother of the victim filed a complaint on 30.10.2009 in connection with the said incident before Vemagal Police Station in Kolar District, within whose jurisdiction the said incident occurred. 2. The complaint reads as under:(œLanguage?) 3. On the strength of the complaint given by J.V. Narayanaswamy, Vemagal Police registered a case in Crime No.212/2009 for the offences punishable under Sections...
Tag this Judgment!Samuel Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and the District Election Officer a ...
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
(Prayer: This WP Is Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 Of The Constitution of India Praying To Quash The Impugned Order At Annexure-C Dated 21.03.2014 Passed By The Respondent No.2.) 1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties. 2. Being aggrieved by the prayer rejecting the request of the petitioner to retain the firearm and same being ordered to be deposited with the jurisdictional police on account of the ensuing Loksabha Elections- 2014 being held by impugned order dated 21.03.2014, petitioner is before this Court. 3. It is the contention of Mr.G.N.Narasammanavar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that there is non-consideration of the representation submitted by the petitioner in proper perspective by respondent No.1 and when there is a life threat to the petitioner, he has to retain his firearm and if he surrenders the same he would be defenceless. He submits by a cryptic order,, respondent No.1 could not have rejected the petitioner's prayer. Hence, he prays...
Tag this Judgment!B.N. Dhananjaya and Another Vs. K.R. Suresh Kumar and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2014
(Prayer: This MFA is filed U/'S 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated: 20/12/2010 passed in MVC No. 9027/2009 on the file of the XVI Additional Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City (SCCH-14), partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.) (Prayer: This MFA is filed CJ/S 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated: 20/12/2010 passed in MVC No. 9027/2009 on the file of the XVI Additional Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City (SCCH-14), awarding a compensation of Rs.10,19,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization and modify the same.) 1. These two appeals by the claimant/injured and by the Insurer are directed against the same impugned judgment and award dated 20/ 12/2010 passed in MVC No. 9027/2009, by the XVI Additional Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City (SCCH-14), (hereinafter referred to as ' Tribunal' for short) 2. The T...
Tag this Judgment!A.S. Chandraprakash Vs. the Labour Officer and Minimum Wages Enquiring ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2014
(Prayer: This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 Of Constitution Of India Praying To Quask The Impugned Award Dated 26.9.2012 Passed Ey The R1 In Mw No. 5/12 Vide Ann-A; ETC.) 1. Petitioner-employer, issued with a notice to appear before the 1st respondent - Labour Officer, Minimum Wages Authority in a proceeding under section 20[2] of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 [for short Act'], when not available ai the postal address, the postal authorities placed the intimation in the post box assigned to the petitioner, at Chikmagalur, which was not opened by the petitioner since away at Mumbai and on return on 29.5.2012, having opened the post box though noticed the intimation, nevertheless awaited further notice from the Minimum Wages Authority. According to the petitioner, on receipt of a copy of the order dated 26.9.2012, acknowledged on 10.1.2013, filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to set aside the order placing him ex parte and to extend an opportunity of hearing...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. R. Muni Reddy Vs. Bangalore University Jnanabharathi and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2014
(Prayer: This Petition Is Filed Under Article 226 Of The Constitution Of India, Praying To Call For The Entire Records And Quash Notification Dated 4.1.2014 Vide Annexure-V Issued By The Respondent/Bangalore University By Issue Of A Writ In The Nature Of Certiorari And Direct The Respondent/University By Issue Of A Writ In The Nature Of Mandamus To Continue The Petitioner In The Service Of The Respondent/University Till He Attains The Age Of 62 Years I.E., Upto 31,03.2016 And Grant All Consequential Benefits.) 1. The material facts lie within a narrow compass. The petitioner joined service of the Bangalore University (for shore.. 'the University0 during 1985 as a temporary Lecturer in Department of Physical Education and was regularised by an Order dated 21.03.1994 and earned promotion as Reader/Associate Professor on 21.03.1998. On 08.09.2004, in response to a Notification issued by the University regarding vacancy of the Director, Physical Education, petitioner made an application an...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Krithi Constructions Vs. K. Thippa Reddy and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2014
(Prayer: This W.P. Is Filed Praying To Set Aside The Order Dated 03.03.2014 Passed By The Xxviii Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, C.H.N0.29, Bengaluru City Dismissing The Application Filed U/O 16, Rule 21 R/W Sec.151 Of The Cpc In O.S.N0.15959/Z005, Vide Annx-A By Allowing The Application Filed Before The Trial Court By Allowing This Writ Petition.) 1. By the impugned order, the Court below has rejected the application filed by the petitioner/ second defendant under Order 16 Rule 21 of CPC to summon defendant no. 1/respondent-3 herein for giving evidence on behalf of Petitioner herein. 2. The records reveal that respondents 1 and 2 herein (who are the plaintiffs) filed suit for declaration that the sale deed dated 20.12.2004 executed by first defendant (third respondent herein) based on the forged/fabricated/created General Power of Attorney, in favour of second defendant (petitioner herein) in respect of the suit schedule property as null and void and for consequen...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Karnataka Represented by the Secretary and Others Vs. M/S ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
(Prayer: CRP Filed U/S 55(1) Of Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1957, Against The Order Dt 28.9.11 Passed In STA No.371/2005 On The File Of Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, Allowing The Appeal Filed U/S 32(5)(A) Of Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1957.) (Prayer: CRP Filed U/Sec 55(1) Of Kait Act, 1957, Against The Judgment And Order Dated 07.03.2011 Passed In STA.254/2007 On The File Of Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, Allowing The Appeal Filed U/Sec.34 Of Kait Act.) (Prayer: CRP Filed U/S 55(1) Of Karnataka Agricultural Income-Tax Act, 1957, Against The Order Dated 2.9.2011 Passed In STA No.2424/2010 On The File Of Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, Partly Allowing The Appeal.) (Prayer: CRP Filed U/S 55(1) Of The Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1957 Against The Order Dated: 16.9.2011 In STA No.255/2010 On The File Of The Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, Partly Allowing The Appeal.) (Prayer: CRP Filed U/S 55 Of The Kat Act, Filed Again...
Tag this Judgment!Armugam Vs. Shakuntla and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Art.226/227 of the Constitution praying to quash the order dated 9.7.2012 - annexure A on IA 9 in OS 48232/2007 by the Add! City Civil Judge, Bangalore, etc.) Application was filed by the plaintiff before the trial court in IA 9 under O 14, R 5 r/w S. 151, CPC in a suit filed for declaration to declare him as the owner/successor of the suit property on the death of his sister in law Dhanbagyammal and also for recovery of possession. The matter was contested by the defendants. As it transpires, there is also a Will. It is also stated that defendants claim to be the adopted children of Dhanbagyammal and also there was a Will executed by Dhanbagyammal in favour of 1st defendant. However, denying the same, suit was filed for declaration. On the other hand, written statement was filed by the defendants contending that there was a valid adoption and also there is a Will executed in their favour as such, they sought dismissal of the suit. The trial court ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »