Karnataka Court March 2016 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Honnappa and Another
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Mar-08-2016
B. Manohar, J. 1. The New India Assurance Company Limited has filed this appeal, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 16-7-2009 made in WCA 84/2005/NF passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen Compensation (hereinafter referred to as the WCC for short). 2. The first respondent herein filed a claim petition contending that he was working as a cleaner in the lorry bearing registration No. KA-34/4400 belonging to the second respondent herein. On 14-6-2004, at about 5.00 p.m., while he was getting down from the lorry cabin, due to the slip of hand, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to VIMS hospital, Bellary. A complaint has been lodged before the Contonment Out Post police station. The MLC register was sent to the jurisdictional police by the VIMS hospital on 14-6-2004 itself and the police have also recorded the statement. The claimant has contended that the accident occurred during the course and out of...
K.T. Ramaiah Vs. K.T. Venkataswamy and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2016
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order passed by the R-1 Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, at Bangalore on I.A.No.11, 13 and 17 dated 25.02.2015 in O.S.No.2013/2005 vide Annexure-L.) 1. Plaintiff /petitioner calling in question the order dated 25.02.2015, Annexure-L, passed by Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in O.S.No.2013/2005 dismissing I.A.Nos.11, 13 and 17 filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of plaint. 2. I have heard the arguments of Sri.Shivashankar, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.G.Manivannan, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Insofar as respondent Nos.5 to 7 are concerned, records would indicate that they have been served on the learned counsel who is appearing for them before trial Court and they are not represented by any counsel. Hence, service of notice held sufficient. Writ petition is taken up for...
S.V. Ramesh Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2016
Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. 1. The petitioner has called in question, (a) the report of Karnataka Upa-Lokayukta issued under Section 12(3) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 dated 7.4.2015; (b) the order dated 12.6.2015 passed by the first respondent State Government; and (c) the Articles of Charge dated 23.7.2015 issued by the second respondent Karnataka Lokayukta against the petitioner. 2. Based on the allegation that the petitioner has permitted an unauthorised and illegal construction in property bearing No.1/1A, Rathna Complex, Byadarahalli, Magadi Main Road, Bangalore, complaint came to be lodged against the petitioner on 13.10.2010 before Karnataka Lokayukta; the complaint reveals that the petitioner while working as Assistant Executive Engineer, Herohalli Sub-division under Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike ( BBMP for short) during the period 5.3.2010 to 26.5.2010, permitted an unauthorised and illegal construction as mentioned supra. The Statement of Objections were filed by th...
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. STCL Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2016
Jayant Patel, J. 1. The appellant - Revenue has preferred the present appeal, by raising the following substantial question of law: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in deleting the addition made by assessing authority on the ground that once the purchases are accepted by the assessing authority and are duly accounted for in the particular year, the loss due to fall in value of stocks represented by those purchases has to be allowed even when the method of accounting adopted by the assessee company for A.Y. 2009-10 was not accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the Company, as enunciated in the provisions of section 145A of the Act"? 2. We have heard Mr. K.V. Arvind, learned counsel appearing for the appellant - Revenue. 3. We may record that the Tribunal while dealing with the contention of the assessee and the appellant -Revenue on the aforesaid aspect, has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 and 10 as under: "9. A lot o...
Sri H N Ramachandra Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2016
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE8H DAY OF MARCH, 2016 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.32/2010 BETWEEN: SRI H N RAMACHANDRA S/O H S NANJUNDASWAMY AGED ABOUT48YEARS R/AT NO.167/B, 6TH CROSS MARUTHI EXTENSION, SRIRAMPURA BANGALORE. ... PETITIONER (By Sri: T SUBRAMANYA, ADV.) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA BY POLICE INSPECTOR RAJAJINAGAR P.S. BANGALORE REP.BY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE. (By Sri: S. RACHAIAH, HCGP) ... RESPONDENT2THIS CRL.RP FILED U/S.397 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED2611.09 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.281/2004 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. S.J., AND P.O., FTC-IV, BANGALORE CITY AND ACQUIT THE PETR. FROM THE CHARGES LEVELLED AGAINST THE PETR. THIS CRL. RP COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The present petition is filed under Sections 397, Cr.P.C. challenging the judgme...
Sri. s.v. Ramesh Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-2016
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE8h DAY OF MARCH, 2016 R PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR AND THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B. WRIT PETITION NO.2581/2016 (GM-KLA) BETWEEN: Sri S.V.Ramesh S/o Late P. Venkatachalaiah Aged about 51 years Working as Assistant Executive Engineer Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board East-II Sub-Division Kundalahalli, BEML Layout Bangalore-560 066 (By Sri M.S.Bhagwat, Adv.,) AND : ..Petitioner 1. State of Karnataka Department of Urban Development Represented by its Principal Secretary Bangalore-560 001 2 2. The Karnataka Lokayukta Represented by its Registrar M.S. Building Bangalore-560 001 3. The Additional of Enquiries-6 Karnataka Lokayuktha M.S.Building Bangalore-560 001 4. Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board 9th Floor, Cauvery Bhavan Rep. by its Chief Administrative Officer/ Secretary Bangalore-09 (amended as per Court Order dated 8.2.2016) ..Respondents (By Sri E.S.Indiresh, HCGP for R-1) (Sr...
Karnataka State Board of Wakf Vs. The Special Deputy Commissioner and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in the Writ Petition No.6971/2008 dated 26.05.2008.) K.L. Manjunath, J. 1. The legality and correctness of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6971/2008, dated 26.05.2008, is called in question in this petition. 2. We have heard the learned Senior Counsel for both the parties. 3. The appellant was the petitioner in W.P.No.6971/2008, which was filed by him challenging the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, dated 20.03.2008, passed in Appeal No.341/2007. The said appeal was filed by respondent no.3, Sri. Ameer Pasha, challenging the order passed by the first respondent-Special Deputy Commissioner, dated 05.03.2007 in case No.INA.CR.19/2000-2001. 4. The facts leading to his appeal are as hereunder: The third respondent Sri.Ameer Pasha, claiming to be a tenant under the fourth respondent mosque in respect of 10 acres of land s...
Puttaiah and Mahesh Vs. State by Rural Police, Hassan, Represented by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2016
(This Crl.RP is filed u/s. 397 r/w. 401 Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment dated 23.09.2010 passed by the P.O. and Addl. S.J. FTC, Hassan in Crl.A.28/07 and Judgment and sentence of conviction dated 01.03.07 passed by the Prl.C.J. (JR.DN.) and JMFC., Hassan in C.C.No. 122/02 and dismiss the Complaint of the Respondent.) Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent. 2. The present revision petition is filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the JMFC-II in C.C.No.122/2007 and affirmation of the same by the learned Judge of the fast Track Court in Crl. Appeal No. 28/2007. 3. The appellant was the sole accused in Criminal case bearing C.C.No.122/2002. He had faced a trial for the offences punishable under Sections 239 and 304A of IPC. He is directed to pay fine a sum of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC in default to undergo simple imprisonment for ...
The State of Karnataka by Nyamathi Police Station, Nyamathi, Honnali V ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2016
(Prayer: Crl. A. Filed U/S. 378(1) and (3) of Cr.P.C. by the State P.P. for the state praying that this Hon ble Court may be pleased to grant leave to file an appeal against the Judgement and Order of Acquittal dt. 1/12/2011 passed by the I Addl. Dist. and Sessions Judge, Davanagere in S.C. No. 37/2011 Acquitting the accused for the Offence P/U/S. 302 and 201 of IPC.) A.V. Chandrashekara, J. 1. This appeal filed under Section 378(1) and (3), Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of acquittal passed by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Davanagere, in S.C. 37/01. The respondent herein will be referred to as accused as per his ranking before the trial court. He had faced trial for the offence punishable under Section 302, I.P.C. and is ultimately acquitted by the trial court by a considered judgment dated 10.2.2007. 2. The matter is already admitted. The facts leading to the filing of the appeal are as follows: a) Accused is a resident of Machogondanahalli village, Honnali Taluk, Davana...
G. Rangappa Vs. K.T. Thimmappa and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-2016
(Prayer: This Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. Praying against the Judgment and Decree dated 17.01.2014 Passed in R.A.NO.79/2002 on the file of the PRL. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Madhugiri (Sitting at Pavagada), dismissing the appeal and confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 15.3.2002 passed in O.S.NO.128/1993 on the file of the PRL. Civil Judge (JR.DN) and JMFC, Pavagada.) 1. These two appeals have been preferred by Sri G Rangappa, who is fifth defendant in O.S.No.128/1993 and plaintiff in O.S.No.178/1993, questioning the correctness and legality of judgment and decree passed in R.A.No.79/2002 and R.A.No.80/2002 respectively whereunder the appeals filed by fifth defendant/plaintiff came to be dismissed by judgment and decree dated 17.01.2014 confirming the common judgment and decree passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Pavagada who had decreed the suit O.S.No.128/1993 filed by the plaintiffs, declaring that plaintiffs have right of way through land be...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »