Karnataka Court August 2015 Judgments
M/s. Malind Properties Pvt Ltd. and Others Vs. Murugayah Kanapathy and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
(Prayer: This Compa is filed u/s 10F of the Companies Act, 1956, praying to set aside the order of the company law board dated 22.12.2014 in Company Petition No.76 of 2014 on the file of the Company Law Board, Chennai and allow the appeal; and etc., Vineet Saran, J. 1. This is an appeal filed by the Company as well as other shareholders [who were arrayed as respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 5 in the Company Petition No.76/2014 filed before the Company Law Board ('the Board' for short)]. The petition before the Board was filed by respondents No.1, 2 and 3 in this appeal, alleging oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of the Company. By an order dated 22.12.2014, an interim order was passed by the Board whereby certain prayers for interim relief had ƒbeen granted. At the time of issuing notice of this appeal an exparte interim order was passed by this Court on 22.05.2015: "The respondents 1 to 3 filed a petition under Sec.397 and other provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 claiming m...
Tag this Judgment!Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company Limited (GESCOM) (Formerly known a ...
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for for respondent. 2. The petitioners are the Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company (formerly the Karnataka Electricity Board') and seek to question the award in favour of the respondent herein. The respondent was engaged as a lineman on daily wage basis, for the first time in the year 1962. It is the claim of the petitioners that he was engaged on casual basis, whenever there was work available and there were as many as 7 casual workers who were working intermittently between 1972-1977. The 6 casual workers who had been disengaged used to approach the petitioners for casual work and they were being accommodated. The respondent did not seek any casual jobs after 1977. It is only thirteen years later that he had raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer. The conciliation having failed, the Government had refused to make reference. 3. The said action was challenged by the respondent before this Court in a writ ...
Tag this Judgment!Bharatiya Janata Party, Karnataka Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned notice dated 16.8.2015 issued by the R-2 herein vide Annexure-'A' and consequently direct the respondents to shift the Kodandaramapuram Government School Polling Booth to any other nearby public place.) 1. The petitioner, the Bhararatiya Janata Party, is aggrieved by the notice dated 16.08.2015 issued by the Office of the Election Officer/Assistant Election Officer whereby, the Election Officer has directed the party for "closing of the party symbol and for vacating of the office flag on 21.08.2015 and 22.08.2015 respectively". 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had established their Head Quarters in 2011, at No.48. Temple Street, 11th Cross, Malleshwaram, Bengaluru. Since it is the State Head Quarter of a political party, it has not only adorned the building with the symbol of the party, but also has a party flag hoisted on a pole in front o...
Tag this Judgment!Official Liquidator Of; M/s. B.S. Refrigerators Ltd. and Others Vs. M/ ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
(Prayers: This Application is filed under Rule 6 and 9 of the Companies [Court] Rules, 1959, praying to set-aside the sale conducted by ARCIL Mumbai; and etc., This Application is filed under Rule 6 and 9 of the Company [Court] Rules, 1959, r/w Section 449 of the Companies Act, 1956, Praying to take into consideration the completion of sale in a transparent manner by public auction and the applicant may be permitted to appropriate the sale proceeds towards the amounts due from the company in liquidation. This Application is filed under Rule 6 and 9 of the Company [Court] Rules, 1959, r/w Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, praying that for the reasons stated therin pleased to set aside the sale certificate dated 15.03.2010 [Anne - C] issued by the R2 to the R3 and etc., This Application is filed under Rule 6 and 9 of the Co., [Court] Rules, 1959, praying to issue appropriate directions to all the respondents herein to preserve, protect and not to alienate any portion of the Governm...
Tag this Judgment!M/s. Kumaraswamy Mineral Exports and Another Vs. The Commercial Manage ...
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
(Prayer: The writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the R1 and R2 to relese the iron ore transported from Yeshwanthnagar Railway to Gandhidham Railway station as per the Railway receipts bearing No.212000758. 212000768, 212000769 dispatched on 30.1.2008, 7.2.2008 and 8.2.2008 respectively to the consignee petitioner No.1., and etc.) 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The present petition is filed in the following circumstances: The first petitioner is said to be an exporter of minerals, including iron ore, and the same was transported by road and rail. It was the practice for the petitioner to book railway rakes, well in advance, for the purpose of transportation of iron ore. The first petitioner was said to despatch iron ore through railway wagons from Yeshwanth Nagar Railway Station, Hospet. The second petitioner was the authorized transporter who transported iron o...
Tag this Judgment!Gration Anil Pinto Vs. State by the Commissioner of Central Excise (SI ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 2. A case in File No. IV/06/85/2013-14 SIV-CELL on the file of the respondent-State by the Commissioner of Central Excise (SIV-1) and Service Tax Cell, Mangaluru Central, Mangaluru, for the offences punishable under Section 89 (1)(d)(ii) of Finance Act, 1994 (in short the Act') is filed against the petitioner. Apprehending his arrest at the hands of the respondent-Police he has filed anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. 3. The case of the respondent-State is that the petitioner is running a proprietary concern under the name and style as M/s. JMJ Promotions. He has maintained accounts, audited and filed income tax returns for the financial years 2012-13 and 2013-14. He is required to pay the service tax on various services provided by him under the provisions of the Act. As per notification with effect from 20-6-2012 the ser...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmibai Vs. The State Election Commissioner, Bengaluru and Others
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondent No.1 to direct Respondent No.2 issue notification regarding the calendar of events and to conduct the elections for the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha to the Gram Panchayat of Kherda (B) of Basavakalyan Taluka in Bidar District as per the provision of Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act etc.) H.G. Ramesh, (Oral): 1. This writ petition is by a member of Kherda (B) Grama Panchayat for a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to hold election to the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of the aforesaid Grama Panchayat. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the total number of members of Kherda (B) Grama Panchayat is 20, and, 13 members have been elected to the Grama Panchayat. As 13 members form Two thirds of the total membership of the Grama Panchayat, there is no legal impediment to hold election to the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhya...
Tag this Judgment!Govinda Rajaiah Vs. The State of Karnataka, By Its Secretary and Anoth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash the tender notification dt.16.3.2015 issued by the R2 in Tender No.19/2014-15 (through E-Procurement) as per Annx-E in so far as it relates to Item No.11 Indent No.3339 of Chattenahalli Village, B.D.pura grama panchayath is concerned and etc.) 1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the tender notification dated 16.03.2015 impugned at Annexure-E to the petition. The petitioner is seeking for issue of mandamus to direct the second respondent to complete the process in furtherance to the acceptance of the tender dated 12.03.2015. 2. The respondents had issued a tender notification dated 09.01.2015 indicating therein several works for which the tenders were invited. The petitioner had responded to the tender in respect of the work indicated in Sl.No.38 i.e., to undertake the work for installation of the pipe line under the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Scheme t...
Tag this Judgment!Somakku Vs. The State of Karnataka, Department of Revenue, Bangalore a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order passed by the R2, in Case No.DHL/490/82-83 DT.29.6.94, vide Ann-B. direct the Land Tribunal /R2 to rehear the matter afresh regarding the application filed by the petitioner regarding grant of rights in respect of the dwelling house and the land appurtent to therein and etc.,) 1. This petition filed on 09.03.2010 assailing the order dated 29.06.2014, Annexure-B of the Land Tribunal, Bantwal, partly allowing petitioner's application in Form 2A under Rule 9A(1) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1974 read with Section 38 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, claiming to be registered as the owner of a dwelling house along with site and land immediately abutting thereto, in an extent of 1 acre 80 cents in Sy.No.67/2 of Kallige village, Bantwala Taluk, insofar as it relates to rejection of 1 acre 33 cents on the premise that no notice was served on the petitioner by ...
Tag this Judgment!Rathnamma Vs. Premavathi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
(Prayer: This HRRP is filed U/Sec.46(1) of Karnataka Rent Act, against the order dated: 23/04/2014 passed on I.A.02 in HRC.No.10040/2009 on the file of the XV-Addl Judge, Court of Small Causes, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru, Allowing I.A.No.2 filed U/sec.43 of the Karnataka Rent Act.) 1. Order dated 23.04.2014 passed by the Court of Small Causes, Bangalore in H.R.C.No.10040/2009, thereby allowing I.A.No.2 filed by the respondent under Section 43 of the Karnataka Rent Act (for short 'the Act') ordering stoppage of further proceedings in HRC No.10040/2009 with a direction to the parties to approach the Civil Court seeking declaration of their rights and title over the petition schedule premises is challenged in this revision petition. 2. Petitioner has filed the eviction petition seeking a direction to the respondent to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the premises contending inter alia that respondent was a tenant under the revision petitioner. Eviction petition is filed under Sectio...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »