Court : Karnataka Dharwad
(prayer: this appeal is filed under section 100 of cpc against the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2006 passed in r.a no.134/2000 on the file of the i addl. civil judge, (sr.dn.), hubli, partly allowing the appeal and modifying the judgment and decree dated 28.08.2000 passed in o.s no.194/1989 on the file of the iii addl. civil judge (jr.dn.), hubli.) this is a plaintiff's second appeal against the concurrent findings recorded by the courts below that the plaintiff is not entitled to decree of specific performance and is only entitled to decree of recovery of money paid under the agreement of sale. in fact, the defendant has also filed cross-objections challenging the findings of the courts below regarding the proof of execution of the agreement of sale and payment of consideration under the agreement of sale. 2. for the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit. 3. the subject matter of the suit is the non- agricultural land comprised in cts no.2093/b measuring 2889.10 sq. mtrs. situated in ayodhya nagar within the limits of hubli-dharwad municipal corporation in cts ward no.5. prior to its conversion, the schedule property was a part of the southern portion of r.s.no.16 measuring 29 guntas. for short, the said property is referred to as 'the schedule property'. 4. defendant is the owner of agricultural land bearing schedule property. he was interested to sell the schedule property and the plaintiff was willing to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
(prayer: the petition is filed under article 226 and 227 of the constitution of india, praying to quash the endorsement dated 17.11.2011 issued by the second respondent as per annexure- j as illegal and void and to direct the respondents to consider the case of petitioner for appointing the petitioner to the post of first divisional assistant by passing modified order on the basis of the qualification with all consequential service and monetary benefits flowing there from and the suitable order.) 1. petitioner herein is impugning the endorsement dated 17.11.2011 issued by second respondent vide annexure _ j . 2. brief facts leading to this writ petition are as under: petitioner herein is son of late mohammad ismail yaligar who was working as chief officer of kamalapur, taluk: hospet, bellary district. it is stated that the petitioners father, mohammad ismail yaligar. died in harness on 10.02.1994. immediately thereafter the petitioner as legal representative of deceased mohammad ismail yaligar, filed an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground. subsequently his representation was considered and he was appointed as s.d.a. by appointment order dated 09.05.2001. 3. petitioner accepted the offer of appointment and thereafter made a representation that as on the date of his appointment, he had completed graduation in b.a, and as he was eligible for the post of f.d.a., considering his appointment as s.d.a., is opposed to the decision rendered by the division bench of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
(prayer: these writ appeals filed u/s 4 of the karnataka high court act, praying to call for records and set aside the order dated 17.03.2009, passed by the learned single judge, in the writ petition no.19684/2007 and etc.,) 1. the appellants are all land owners who have lost their lands or in the process of losing and in fact they are fighting a losing battle to save their lands for livelihood or sustenance due to the compulsory take over of this land by the state government by issue of notifications u/s 3 (1), (3) and 28 of the karnataka industrial areas development act, 1966 (for short the act). 2. appellants/land owners effort to save their lands from the sweep of acquisition by the state government by filing writ petitions before this court having failed as the learned single judge of this court opined that there is no merit in the contentions urged in support of the writ petitioners, challenge to the acquisition proceedings under the act and more so, the number of writ petitioners before the court who had questioned the validity of the acquisition proceedings by the state government being not even 1/10th of the land holders whose lands had been notified for acquisition and more so when more than 9/10th of the land losers had in fact given their consent for acquisition or to be precise if they have not chosen to challenge the legality of acquisition proceedings and if the court should interfere with the acquisition proceedings by the state government even at the instance .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
1. this appeal is by the accused against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence date 12-6-2006 passed by the principal sessions and special judge, dharwad in special (svc) c.c.no.13 of 1991 convicting the appellant-accused for the offence punishable under section 13(1)(e) read with section 13(2) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988 (for short, the act of 1988) and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay fine of rs.3,89,000/- for the aforesaid offence. 2. the appellant was appointed in hubli dharwad municipality as a surveyor on 1-7-1966. later he was promoted as a junior engineer and ultimately retired from service on 30-3-1994. 3. according to the case of the prosecution, c.w.1-y.v. patil, police inspector, lokayuktha police station, dharwad, by 2-2-1989 received credible information that the appellant-accused has amassed wealth disproportionate to his known source of income by means of corrupt activities. on 2-2-1989, c.w.1 obtained a search warrant and conducted search in the house of the appellant on 2-2-1989 in the presence of the panchas and seized incriminating documents and other evidence from the house of the appellant. investigation by c.w.1 revealed that the appellant has two minor sons and a daughter who were studying in schools and he has got 5 brothers who had no landed properties in agadi village or elsewhere; that on plot bearing nos.14089/13 and 14088 situated in rajatgiri on kalghatagi road, the accused has .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
(prayer: this writ petition is filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india, praying to direct the respondents to consider the representation dated 27.5.2009 made by the petitioner, the copy of which has been produced herewith and marked as annexure-a and appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground to any suitable post in the 1st respondent corporation and quash the order dated 5/12/2005 passed by the 2nd respondent the copy of which has been produced herewith and marked as annexure-b.) 1. petitioner in this petition has sought for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 27th may 2009 made by the petitioner, the copy of which has been produced herewith and marked as annexure a and appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground to any suitable post in the first respondent corporation. further, petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari, to quash the order dated 5th december 2005 bearing no.honnavar:aee: samanya:05-06/3284, passed by second respondent vide annexure b. 2. petitioner herein claims to be the adopted son of the deceased late junvav thomas dias and smt. rita junvav dias on 12th may 1982 according to the customs prevailing in the community and the said adoption was duly registered as per adoption deed dated 11th august 1998. the said adopted son has grown up and has been brought up by his adopted parents and has been under the care and custody of them. 3. when things stood thus, the adopted father of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
(prayer: writ appeal filed u/s 4 of the karnataka high court act praying to set aside the order passed in the writ petition no. 4834/2007 dated 28.09.2007) 1. appellants are owners of some parcels of lands notified initially u/s 3(1) of the karnataka industrial area development act, 1966 (for short the act) as per notification no. ci 565 spq 2006, bangalore, dated 06.12.2006 (copy at annexure-a) and published in the karnataka gazette dated 08.12.2006 declaring it as an industrial area for the purpose of the act. simultaneously, another notification of even date was issued u/s 1 (3) of the act indicating that the provisions of chapter 7 of this act was made applicable and the statutory provisions provided for in this chapter for acquisition and disposal of land so notified will be put into operation. 2. the third notification also came to be issued simultaneously on the very date u/s 28 (1) of the act indicating that the very lands are required for the purpose of establishing industries by the 5th respondent m/s. parivarthana alpasankhyatara agricultural co-operative society, belgaum, and the subject lands are required to be developed for such purpose and are therefore required to be so developed by the karnataka industrial area development board (for short board). a notification was issued by the state government indicating such purpose for acquiring the subject lands. 3. in due course, notices under section 28(2) of the act were served on the owners of the subject lands and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
shylendra kumar,j1. these appeals are by three former judicial officers who had retired on attaining the age of superannuation i.e., on completing the age of 58 years, but who were not happy with and had questioned the orders of retiring them compulsorily at the age of 58, by filing writ petitions before this court, mainly on the ground that they are entitled to continue in service till they attain the age of 60 years.2. it was the stand of the appellants that in terms of rule 95-a of the karnataka civil services rules (for short, the rules), the age of retirement of judicial officers shall be raised to 60 years subject to the following conditions viz.,(1) the high court of karnataka should assess and evaluate the record of the judicial officer for his continued utility well within the time before the attains the age of 58 years by following the procedure for the compulsory retirement under the service rules applicable to him and give him the benefit of the extended superannuation age from 58 to 60 years, only if he is found fit and eligible to continue in service.(2) if found not fit and ineligible, he should be compulsorily retired on his attaining the age of 58 years.(3) the assessment as indicated above should be done before the attainment of the age of 58 years.(4) the above assessment is for evaluating the eligibility to continue in service beyond 58 years of age and is in addition to and independent of the assessment for compulsory retirement that may have to be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
shylendra kumar,j 1. these appeals are by three former judicial officers who had retired on attaining the age of superannuation i.e., on completing the age of 58 years, but who were not happy with and had questioned the orders of retiring them compulsorily at the age of 58, by filing writ petitions before this court, mainly on the ground that they are entitled to continue in service till they attain the age of 60 years. 2. it was the stand of the appellants that in terms of rule 95-a of the karnataka civil services rules (for short, the rules), the age of retirement of judicial officers shall be raised to 60 years subject to the following conditions viz., (1) the high court of karnataka should assess and evaluate the record of the judicial officer for his continued utility well within the time before the attains the age of 58 years by following the procedure for the compulsory retirement under the service rules applicable to him and give him the benefit of the extended superannuation age from 58 to 60 years, only if he is found fit and eligible to continue in service. (2) if found not fit and ineligible, he should be compulsorily retired on his attaining the age of 58 years. (3) the assessment as indicated above should be done before the attainment of the age of 58 years. (4) the above assessment is for evaluating the eligibility to continue in service beyond 58 years of age and is in addition to and independent of the assessment for compulsory retirement that may have to be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
(prayer: rfa filed u/s 96 of cpc against the judgment and decree dt.2.11.2006 passed in o.s.no.42/1998 on the file of the civil judge (sr.dn.) and prl.jmfc., ranebennur. partly decreeing the suit for partition and separate possession.) d.v. shylendra kumar, j. 1. plaintiff in o.s.no.42/1998 on the file of the court of civil judge (sr.dn.), prl. jmfc at ranebennur is the appellant u/s 96 of the code of civil procedure. 2. suit was one for partition of the joint family properties impleading the elder brother 0.of the plaintiff as the 1st defendant; elder sister of the plaintiff as the 2nd defendant, daughter of the 2nd defendant as the 3rd defendant and the step mother of the plaintiff as the 4th defendant plaintiff had claimed half share in the suit schedule properties and it is not in dispute that suit items 1a1 and 1a2, the two parcels of agricultural land abutting one another had been purchased in the name of the 1st defendant. the first purchase was on 02.05.1945 when the 1st defendant was a minor and the mother of the 1st defendant acting as guardian of the minor and the second purchase was on 28.05.1969 when the 1st defendant had attained majority by that time. 3. in respect of suit schedule 1d item, the plaintiff pleaded the though the khatha in the revenue records in respect of this land stood in the name of the 3rd defendant, it is also a joint family property having been purchased by the father of the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 in the name of his second wife .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
..... the insurer of the vehicle, who is appellant herein, seriously opposed the claim firstly on the ground that accident has not occurred in the manner averred in the petition and secondly, even if it has occurred involving the lorry in question, it was totally due to act of negligence of the motor cycle rider. ..... from what learned counsel of both sides have adverted, the genesis of appeals is a motor vehicle accident on 26.06.2007 involving a motor cycle bearing no.ka 37/l1346 and a stationery lorry bearing no.ka 25/8235 in which the rider of the motor cycle basanna suffered injuries and died. ..... in the first decision, the motorcycle rider was held to have contributed to the accident by negligence because there was a head-on collision between the vehicles. ..... while dealing with claims for compensation by victims of such accidents, though report is filed by the investigating officer will be relevant for consideration, yet the tribunal is not precluded from deciding the question of negligence in an action under section 166 of he motor vehicles act. 22. ..... such view was taken because the accident occurred while the motorcycle rider was trying to overtake the lorry parked in the same direction. ..... thus, the contention is that accident was as a result of culpable negligence of the motor cycle rider in which no act of even actionable negligence could be attributed to the lorry driver. 5. ..... the pillion rider also died in the said accident. .....
Tag this Judgment!