Karnataka Court February 2016 Judgments
C. Valli Narayan Vs. C. Vinod Hayagriv and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
1. This contempt petition is filed complaining of disobedience of orders dated 23.09.2014 and 18.11.2014 passed by Company Law Board in Co.P.No.54/2014. 2. By an order dated 23.09.2014 the Company Law Board granted an ad interim relief. The said order was continued until further orders by an order dated 18.11.2014. However, the relevant order for our purpose reads as under: The Respondents are hereby restrained from diverting the business if any of the respondent No.1 company either directly or indirectly to respondent No.10 or any other Company until 19.11.2014. Complaining disobedience of this order, this petition is filed invoking the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties regarding maintainability of a contempt petition. 4. Learned counsel for complainant contends in the Companies Act, 1956 there is no specific provision for proceeding against a person who had disobeyed the orders of the Board. However, Section 634A which provi...
Tag this Judgment!M.G. Pandit Vs. Indian Bank, by its Deputy General Manager
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in Writ Petition No.17400/2009 dated 25/07/2013.) Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, Chief Justice 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated July 25, 2013, passed by the Hon ble Single Judge in Writ Petition No.17400 of 2009. 2. The writ petitioner appellant was posted as the Manager of Benson Town Branch of the Indian Bank between June 25, 1990 to April 9, 1991. During his tenure, he committed serious irregularities in the accounts of Nayan Steels Private Limited and Rajgir Steels Private Limited. He, also, issued third party cheques to the tune of Rs.2,16,00,000/- (Rupees two crore sixteen lakh) only, for the credit of the said two companies. From 1990 onwards, those cheque purchases were far in excess of his powers. Thus, he violated the norms of lending in total disregard to his responsibilities and interest of the Bank. Moreover, his reckless attitude cause...
Tag this Judgment!K.S. Sivalingappa Vs. State Bank of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
1. Rule. 2. Learned Counsel for respondents waives notice of rule . 3. The matter is finally heard. 4. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petitions seeking an appropriate write to quash and set as the order passed by the respondent namely, Hon ble Upalokayuktha as well as respondent 2, whereby the enquiry was commenced and action initiated by framing of charges. The petitioner has also prayed for the consequential relief to quash the charge sheet issued pursuant to the above order passed by the Upalokayuktha. 5. We have heard Mr P.N. Rajeswara, learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. H.B. Mahesh, learned Government pleader appearing for respondent 3, Mr. Mallikarjun C. Basareddy, learned Counsel for respondent 2 and Mr. Basavaraj V. Sabarad, learned Counsel for respondent 3. 6. Upon hearing the learned Counsel appearing for both sides, we find that there is considerable force in the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner regarding the non-applicability of the Ka...
Tag this Judgment!B.K. Abdulla and Another Vs. Muthoot Finance Ltd., and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
(Prayer: This Crl.P is filed U/s.482 Cr.P.C praying to quash the order dated 20.03.2013 passed by the II Addl. Dist. and S.J., D.K., Mangalore in Crl.R.P.No.51/2011.) 1. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the order dated 20.03.2013 in Crl.R.P.No.51/2011 on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangalore. 2. Petitioner No.1-B.K. Abdulla lodged a complaint before Surathkal police station alleging that his gold ornaments and that of petitioner No.2 his relative are stolen by one Mayyadi and his wife Jubeda. A crime came to be registered for the offences punishable under Sections 407 and 420 of IPC. After investigation charge-sheet is also filed for the aforesaid offences. During the course of investigation, gold ornaments were seized from the Muthoot Finance Ltd., and Sree Gokarnanatha Co-operative Bank Ltd. The seizure has been reported to the Magistrate. The complainant/B.K. Abdulla and petitioner No.2 filed an application un...
Tag this Judgment!M/s. Belgaum Minerals, rep. by its Authorized signatory K. Venu Vs. St ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order dated 21.12.2015 issued by respondent No.2, produced as Annexure-A and etc.) Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, CJ. 1. This is a writ petition challenging the order No.RB:ML:CR:106:2015-16 dated December 21, 2015, issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Belagavi district, holding that the writ petitioner has been unauthorisedly undertaking non-agricultural activities on certain agricultural lands in violation of the provisions of Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, ( the said Act , in short) and, further, claiming payment of conversion charges and penalty under sub-section (4) of Section 96 of the said Act read with rule 107-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966. Moreover, pursuant to the aforesaid order of the Deputy Commissioner, Belagavi, the writ petitioner has been prevented from undertaking any further activities on the disputed lands. 2. The writ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka Vs. Gowtham
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378 (1) and (3) Cr.P.C. by the state P.P. for the state praying that this Hon ble Court may be pleased to grant leave file an appeal against the judgment dated 7.3.11 passed by the II Addl. Dist., and S.J., Mysore in S.C. No.77/10 acquitting the respondent for the offence P/U/S 366 A and 376 of IPC.) Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. 1. The judgment and order of acquittal dated 7.3.2011 passed by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mysore, in S.C.NO.77/2010 is called in question in this appeal by the State. By this impugned judgment and order the Trial Court has acquitted the respondent/accused who was charged with the offence punishable under Sections 366A and 376 of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the victim PW2 was aged about 15 years at the time of incident; her date of birth is 27.4.1995; PW.3 C.V. Mohan is her father and PW.12 Rajeshwari is her mother, PW.1 C.V. Yathish Kumar is her junior paternal uncle. The a...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Director, B.M.T.C., Now through Chief Law Officer Vs. Dea ...
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
(Prayer: This appeal is filed u/s 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 06.06.2015 passed in MVC No.4819/2012 on the file of the 2nd Additional Small Causes Judge and 28th ACMM, MACT, Bengaluru, awarding the compensation of Rs.25,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the deposit. This appeal is filed u/s 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 06.06.2015 passed in MVC No.4819/2012 on the file of the II Additional Small Causes Judge and XXVIII ACMM, MACT, Bengaluru, awarding compensation of Rs.25,000/- since the petitioner herein is liable to pay of Rs.12,500/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the deposit.) 1. Since common questions of law and that of fact arise for decision making, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, appeals are clubbed together, finally heard and disposed of by this order. 2. MFA No.442/2016 is filed by the Managing Director of BMTC, Bengaluru Central Office along with I.A...
Tag this Judgment!Kavita Raghunath Irama and Others Vs. Prabhu Maruthi Irame and Others
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
S. Sujatha, J. 1. Claimants/appellants are in appeal in MFA No. 30346/2010 against the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Basavakalyan in MVC No. 83/2006. MFA Crob. No. 1007/2010 is filed by the claimants/cross-objectors in MFA No. 30828/2009 (MVC No. 71/2006 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Basavakalyan). 2. Facts of the case in brief are : The two claim petitions viz., MVC No. 71/2006 and 83/2006 were filed by the claimants under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the 'Act for short) claiming compensation for the alleged death of driver and pillion rider of Bajaj CT 100 vehicle bearing Regn. No. KA-39/H-2653 involved in the road accident that occurred on 1/2-6-2006 on National Highway No. 9, within the limits of Traffic Police Station, Basavakalyan due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing Regn. No. HR-38/R-0766 which collided with the vehicle in which the deceased were travelling. The Tribunal after considering the evide...
Tag this Judgment!Hanumanthanayak Vs. State of Karnataka by Railway Police Force, repres ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
This Crl.RP filed U/S.397 R/W 401 Cr.P.C by the Advocate for the Petitioner praying that this Hon ble Court may be pleased to set aside the Judgment dt: 20.8.10 passed by the P.O. FTC-III, Holenarasipura in Crl.A. 56/10 and order dt: 19.5.10 passed by the Addl. C.J.M., Holenarasipura in C.C.NO. 3/07 and acquit by allowing the Crl.R.P. 1. Heard the learned concept by the petitioner and learned HCGP. 2. The present petition is filed under section 397, Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned JMFC, Holenarsipur, in C.C. 3/07 and affirmation of the same by the 1st appellate court in Crl. Appeal No. 56/10. Petitioner was the accused in C.C. 3/07, a case registered by the Railway Police, Mysuru, against him for the offense punishable under Section 161 of the Railways Act, 1989. 3. The case of the prosecution is as follows: a) The accused was the driver of a tractor-trailer bearing No. KA-13-TA-222-223 belonging to CW-8, Kalegowda of Nagarthi village. ...
Tag this Judgment!High Court of Karnataka, rep. by its Registrar General, Bengaluru Vs. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
(Prayer: This CCC suo-moto civil contempt petition is filed under section 11 and 12 of the contempt of Courts act 1971 r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India, against the accused Sri Periya Swamy, the Regional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., for not complying with the order dated 19/03/2015 in MFA Nos.10536/12, 10537/2012 and 10538/12 passed by this Hon'ble Court. This CCC suo-moto civil contempt is being filed as per the order dated 6/10/2015 passed by this Hon'ble Court in I.A.1/12 in the aforesaid MFAS.) N. Kumar, J. 1. This is a suo moto contempt proceedings initiated by High Court of Karnataka against accused to take action against Regional Manager with regard to disobeying the order dated 19.03.2015 passed in MFA 10536/2012, MFA 10537/2012 and MFA 10538/2012 and punish the accused herein in accordance with law in the ends of justice. 2. Brief facts leading to contempt petition are as under: Petitioners in MVC 1312/2008, MVC 1313/2008 and MVC 1314/2008 initiated pr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »