Court : Karnataka
M.P. Chinnapa, J.1. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1 on 16.05.1998 notified its intention to record 1000 numbers of each audio cassette of three songs viz. 'Kallusak-karc Kolliro', 'maduve maduve maduve' and 'chinnada hadugalu' and sent inlay cards of the above 3 cassettes along with 3 demand drafts of Rs. 1,500/ each towards royalty payable in favour of the copy right owner the appellant herein. The respondent No. 1 also after waiting for 15 days proceeded to sound record audio cassettes of the 3 above titled songs and released the same in the open market and the same was circulated throughout Karnataka State despite the appellant's refusal to grant licence/consent to do the same. Subsequently as the respondent apprehended that all the cassettes would be seized it filed a suit in O.S. 4792/98 on the file of the VIII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore, along with an application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC for temporary injunction restraining the defendants, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. These three writ appeals are filed by (1) Mr. B. Srinivasa Reddy who is appointed as the Managing Director; (2) Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board); and (3) the State Government represented by its Secretary to the Urban Development Department respectively questioning the correctness of the order dated 10-1-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 9852 of 2004 (S-RES) (Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board Employees' Association, Dharwad and Anr. v. State of Karnataka and Ors. 2006(1) Kar. L.J. 448), holding that the appointment of B. Srinivasa Reddy, the appellant in W.A. No. 86 of 2006, as Managing Director on contract basis with effect from 1-2-2004 as per Annexure-A and his continuation in the said office for nearly two years is illegal and he is an usurper of the said public office and further issuing a writ of quo warranto ousting him from the office of the Managing Director of the Board,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1. By the impugned order, the Court below has dismissed the application filed by the petitioners under Section 231(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C"). By filing the said application, the petitioners had prayed for deferring the cross-examination of PW.1, until the examination-in-chief of CWs. 2 to 5, is recorded.2. Petitioners herein are accused Nos. 1 and 4. facing trial in Spl. Case. 152/2004 in the Court of Special Judge for NDPS, Bangalore City, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The investigation records disclose that the officials of Narcotic Control Bureau allegedly seized 8 kgs. of heroin, from the premises bearing No. 17/4, Laijinagar, Lakkasandra, Bangalore, under the mahazar dated 30.12.2003. On commencement of the trial, the complainant examined the official witness by name Sri H.Shivakumar, Intelligence Officer of Narcotic Control Bureau, Chennai a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1. The instant writ petition has been preferred by three petitioners, P.R.Ramesh, M.Ramachandrappa and T.Prabhakar. It is a petition filed in public interest. Petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are former Mayors of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (hereinafter referred to as the BMP). The BMP has now been renamed as the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (hereinafter referred to as the BBMP). The erstwhile BMP had jurisdiction over an area of 227 sq.kms., whereas, the BBMP covers an area of about 800 sq.kms. The BMMP now includes 7 additional city Municipal Councils, 1 town Municipal Council, and 1 11 villages surrounding Bangalore city, which were not included in the BMP. The third petitioner is a former Chairman of the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation. All the three petitioners are permanent residents of the city of Bangalore. All of them own immovable properties in the city, and are tax payers.2. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioners seek to highlight, that the BBMP is no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1997Kant18; 1997(1)KarLJ474
ORDER1. This petition is presented by the Advocates Association, Bangalore, which is a premier association of Advocates in Karnataka State (which is hereinafter referred to as the 'Association'). The petitioner-association has sought for a direction to the respondents to demolish the existing old building of the Association and to construct in its place a new building at the premises of the City Civil Court Complex, Bangalore.2. Few facts which are relevant for the disposal of this petition as set out by the parties may be briefly stated as hereunder : The case of the Association is that it is a unique association in the State of Karnataka and out of about 22, 000 Advocates in the State, about 8,000 Advocates who are practising in various Courts including the High Court of Karnataka, at Bangalore, are its members and the present premises in occupation of the Association which is located at City Civil Courts Complex is a very old building constructed more than 100 years back; that it is...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1992Kant57
ORDER1. The petitioners, who are the residents of Banashankari Extension I Stage, Block-I, which includes a part of N. R. Colony and Ashokanagar, have embarked on public interest litigation actuated by common cause in defence of public interest. The petitioners arc aggrieved by the location and operation of industries and industrial enterprises in a residential area in alleged gross violation of the provisions of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act. The petitioners are questioning industrial activity in residential locality by establishing and running factories, work-shops, factory sheds, manufacture of greases and lubricating oils by distillation process and also production of inflammable products by respondents-17 to 49. According to the petitioners, these questionable activities are being carried on in the area comprising of Sy. Nos. 39/1, 39/2A and 39/2B of Yediyur Nagasandra village, Bangalore. The land situate in Sy. No. 39/1 is called 'Vajapeyam Terrace Gardens' and thel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1994Kant66; ILR1993KAR2367; 1993(3)KarLJ180
ORDERS. B. Majmudar, C. J.1. A Division Bench of this Court consisting of two of us (Chief Justice under NDVBJ), by its order dated 12-7-1993, in Writ Appeal No. 1509 of 1993, has referred the following question for decision of the Full Bench under S. 7 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 :'Whether the decision of the Division Bench in Rangaiah v. Managing Director, Tumkur Co-operative Market Producers Societies Union Ltd., reported in II.R 1992 Kant 3784, is correct when it takes the view that as per sub-sec. (4) of S. 28A of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, the term of elected President of the Cooperative Society is for the duration of the co-operative year?'Accordingly, this Full Bench was constituted for deciding the said referred question.2. We have heard the learned Advocatefor the appellant in Writ Appeal, who has contended that the referred question be answered in the negative. We have also heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent No. 1, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1991Kant40; ILR1990KAR2718; 1990(3)KarLJ63
ORDERS. Mohan, C. J. 1. It is enough if we refer to the facts of the case in W.P. No. 8371 of 1989. The petitioner is a Public Limited Company operating about 90 stage carriage services in the State of Karnataka and some of them are inter-State routes. 2. For purposes of recruiting qualified trained drivers for the business of the company, the petitioner established two driving schools at Shimoga and Sagar in the district of Shimoga. In order to impart instructions to the learner-drivers in the driving of heavy passenger motor vehicles, the petitioner is owning three omni buses for which necessary licences have been obtained. 3. He has also established a driving school which is regulated by the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the Act) and Rule 30 of the Rules framed under the Act. They contain stringent provisions with reference to the establishment and the running of schools. 4. The petitioner submits that under Art. 246(2) read with Entry No. 35 of List...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2005Kant194; 2005(2)KarLJ32
B.S. Patil, J.1. In the suit for partition brought by Jagathpala Shetty (plaintiff) against his brother Ravikirthi Shetty (defendant 1) and his two sisters Vijayamma and Nagarathnamma (defendants 2 and 3 respectively), the Court below by the judgment and decree dated 22-10-1993 decreed the suit. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, defendants 1 to 3 have preferred this regular first appeal.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their ranks obtained in the Court below. Few facts, which are essential for the purpose of disposal of this appeal may be set out as under:3. The plaintiff-Jagathpala Shetty and defendant 1-Ravikirthi Shetty are the sons of late Raju Shetty. Defendants 2 and 3 are the daughters of late Raju Shetty. The relationship between the parties is not disputed. The case of the plaintiff being that B Schedule properties to the memorandum of plaint were acquired by the late father of the plaintiff and the defendants under a registered...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2001KAR3655; 2002(2)KarLJ106
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. These writ petitions are filed by the elected Councillors of City Municipal Councils and Town Municipal Councils in the State of Karnataka seeking to strike down Sub-rule (6) of Rule 13 of the Karnataka Municipalities (President and Vice-President) Election (Amendment) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') as ultra vires and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to quash the notifications bearing No. UDD 47 MLR 2001, dated 30-5-2001 and UDD 47 MLR 2001 dated 2-6-2001.2. In order to answer the legal questions raised in these writ petitions, certain brief facts are stated as under:The State Government in exercise of its legislative power under Article 243-T(4) and (6) of the Constitution inserted Sub-section (2-A) to Section 42 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (which is hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), providing for reservation to the offices of President and Vice-President in the Municipal Councils and Town Panc...
Tag this Judgment!