Court : Karnataka
(This criminal appeal is filed u/s. 374(2) Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order dt.6/8.10.10 passed by the P.O., Fast Track (Sessions) Court XI, Bengaluru in S.C.No. 523/06 convicting the appellant/accused for the offences P/U/S 366, 376 and 302 of IPC etc.) This criminal appeal is filed u/s. 377 Cr.P.C., praying to enhance the sentence imposed on 6/8.10.10 passed by the P.O., Fast Track (Sessions) Court-XI, Bengaluru in S.C.No. 523/06 convicting the respondent/accused for the offence P/U/S 302 IPC and impose death sentence and respondent/accused in sentenced to undergo R.I. for the rest of his life for the offence P/U/S 302 of IPC. He shall not be released from the jail till the rest of his life. The SPP prays that the above orer of conviction may be enhanced suitably. H. Billappa, J. Crl. A. No. 245/2011 has been filed by the appellant-accused challenging the judgment and order dated 6.10.2010 passed by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track (Sessions) Court-XI, Bengaluru, in S.C. No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India; Praying to quash annexure-a dated 23.02.2011 in case No.W.C.A.N.F.C.8/2008 on the file of the R-3 and Annexure-f dated 16-20/10/2012 in case No.Nil on the file of the R-3 by issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order.) Order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sub-Division-2, Chickmagalur (for short Commissioner ) dated 23.02.2011 awarding compensation of Rs. 1,43,448/- with interest @ 12% p.a. payable after 30 days from the date of award - Annexure-A and endorsement dated 16/20-10-2012 - Annexure-F dismissing the applications filed by writ petitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 are questioned in this writ petition. 2. During pendency of the present writ petition, claimant i.e., first respondent herein had expired and his Legal Representative i.e., wife had been brought on record. Legal representa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE30H DAY OF MAY, 2016 PRESENT: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR R.F.A No.813/2012 BETWEEN:1. 2. Sri U.Vijaya Kumar Aged about 54 years S/o Dr. U Lakshminarayana Rao R/a Pravirs Paradise, No.2, 1st Cross, Ganesh Block, Dinnur Main Road, R.T.Nagar, Bangalore-560 032. Smt.Geetha Rao Aged about 51 years W/o U.Vijaya Kumar R/a Pravirs Paradise, No.2, 1st Cross, Ganesh Block, Dinnur Main Road, R.T.Nagar, Bangalore-560 032. ...APPELLANTS (By Sri P.Udayashankar Rai, Advocate) AND: Smt.Malini V. Rao Aged about 60 years W/o Sri B.K.Vidyaranya Rao proprietress, M/s Tex International R/at No.70, Birch Street, Englewood Cliffs 2 New Jersy 07632, USA Rep. by GPA Holder Smt.B.B.Umadevi D/o Late B.V.Bhaskar Rao R/at No.71, 4th Block (West), 8th `C Main Road, Jayanagar Bangalore-560 011. ... RESPONDENT (By Sri S.Vivekananda, Advocate) This RFA is filed under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure against judg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(This RFA is filed under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 24.02.2012 in Q.S.No.2405/2010 on the file of XII Addl. City Civil Judge at Bangalore (CCH No.27), decreeing the plaintiffs suit for declaration, possession, damages, permanent injunction.) N. Kumar J. 1. This is the defendants' regular first appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 24.02.2012 in O.S.No.2405/2010 passed by the XII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore, decreeing the plaintiffs suit by declaring that the sale deed dated 17.2.2009 in respect of 'B' schedule property, executed by the 1st defendant as the GPA holder of M/s.Tex x International in favour of the 2nd defendant is null and void and not binding on the plaintiff etc. and for damages at the rate of Rs.50,000/- p.m. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred as per their original rank before the trial court. 3. The subject matter of the suit is 'B' schedule property measuring 12070 Sq. feet forming...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal on 22.6.2013, in Appeal No. 1966/ 12, as per Ann-B.) Though writ petitions are listed in Preliminary Hearing in 'B' Group, by consent of learned Advocates appearing for parties they are taken up for final disposal, 2. Heard Sri.H.B.Nagaraja and Sri.M.E.Nagesh, learned Advocates appearing for petitioners, Sri.A.S.Parasara Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and Sri Anantha.H, learned HCGP appearing for the State. 3. Petitioner is a holder of Stage Carriage Permit which is valid upto 26.11.2013 in respect of route from State Bank to Inoli and back via Kankanady, Thokkottu, Deralakaite, Konaje, Gramachavadi, etc. Second respondent is a holder of Stage Carriage Permit for the route State Bank to Thoudagoli and back via, Jyothi, Balmatta, Kankanady, Pumpwell for six round trips. Second respondent filed an applica...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE30h DAY OF MAY2016BEFORE THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI WRIT PETITION No.23967/2016 c/w WRIT PETITION No.21491/2016(LB-BMP) BETWEEN: SRI S GAUTAM RAJ AGED45YEARS, S/O. KHN SIMHA, R/AT No.1988, 1-D-MAIN ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR-2ND STAGE, BENGALURU56004 (BY SRI. MANU KULKARNI, ADV. FOR M/S.COMMON LAW CHAMBERS ) AND:1. ... PETITIONER (COMMON) BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANGARA PALIKE REP. BY ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (WEST) SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BBMP, BENGALURU56000. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER - CHAMARAJPET DIVISION2D FLOOR, BBMP COMPLEX, J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU56000.2.3. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANGARA PALIKE REP. BY JOINT COMMISSIONER (WEST) SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BBMP, BENGALURU56000 ... RESPONDENTS IN W.P.23967/2016 2 1. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANGARA PALIKE REP. BY ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (WEST) SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BBMP, BENGALURU56000. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER - CHAMARAJPET DIVISION2D FLOOR, BBMP COMPLEX, J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU56000. SRI.N.VENK...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayers: W.P.No.23967/16 is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the letter dtd:7.4.2016 issued by R-2 produced at Annexure-H and etc., W.P.No.21491/2016 is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the change order dtd:7.4.2016 issued by E-2 produced at Annexure-G and etc.,) 1. Work or Perish is the bedrock of good governance. In our democratic set up, those who do not work and deliver are to perish, be it Governments or elected body heads or even the contractors engaged by public bodies to deliver public service. 2. The Municipal Corporations are entrusted with the job of maintaining the cleanliness of the town or city and they generally give such work contract to the private parties and the present petitioner before this Court is one such contractor. 3. The petitioner by these two writ petitions claimed identical relief against the respondents-BBMP for substituting him in a contract to undertake cleaning...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the demand notice dated 1.6.2015 at Annexure-A seeking for payment of Rs.9,60,70,489/- as annual difference tax together with interest and penalty from 2008-09 till date and quash the order dated 24.8.2015 at Annexure-B passed by R-3 directing the payment of difference amount calculating the property tax at Rs. 10 per sq. ft., based on the notification dated 21.12.2012 issued by R-2 etc.,). 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner praying for the following main reliefs: (1) Quash demand notice dated 1.6.2015 issued by the Assistant Revenue Officer demanding a sum of Rs.9,60,70,489/- together with interest and penalty from 2008-09. (2) Quash order dated 24.8.2015 passed by Respondent No.3 Joint Commissioner - BBMP directing payment of difference amount at the rate of Rs. 10 per sq. ft., based on notification dated 21.12.2012 issued by Respondent No.2 BBMP. (3) Quash the show cause no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Writ Petition (H.C.) is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus ordering and directing the respondent No.2 to produce before this Court the minor children etc.,) R.B. Budihal, J. 1. Petitioner is the husband of respondent No.2 (contesting respondent). The issue involved in this writ petition is the custody of two minor children (Lakshmi Prasad and Ananth Prasad) born to them, who are presently in the custody of respondent No.2 (mother of the children). The petition is filed seeking the writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, for a direction to the respondent No.2 to produce the children before this Court. Certain further directions are also sought for to cause return of the minor children to the jurisdiction of High Court of Justice Family Division, UK, in compliance with the order dated 29.02.2016 passed by the High Court of Justice Family Division, UK, to enable the minor children to go back to UK, upon her failure to d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1. Heard. 2. In these cases, the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Compulsory Service Training by Candidates Completed Medical Courses Act, 2012, (Karnataka Act 26 of 2015) (for short the Act ). 3. The aforesaid Act has already been stayed in W.P.No.40566/2015 and other connected matters on 6.10.2015. All further proceedings, orders, action, notifications including the Rules etc., pursuant to the said Act have also been stayed. 4. In identical matters in W.P.Nos.25391-25393/2016, taking note of the aforesaid interim order, this Court has passed an order on 28.4.2016 as under: 4. This Court has noticed that large number of writ petitions are being filed by the students, who are about to complete/completed their MBBS/PG/Super Speciality courses in medicine seeking reliefs as has been sought in W.P.No.40566/2015 and other connected matters. It is unnecessary for them to approach this Court for similar reliefs because the impugned Act has been stayed....
Tag this Judgment!