Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999(1)KarLJ603
1. Corruption in a civilised society is a disease like cancer, which if not detected in time is sure to malignise the polity of country leading to disastrous consequences. It is termed as plague which is not only contagious but if not controlled spreads like a fire in a jungle. Its virus is compared with HIV leading to AIDS, being incurable. It has also been termed as Royal thievery. The socio-political system exposed to such a dreaded communicable disease is likely to crumble under its own weight. Corruption is opposed to democracy and social order, being not only anti people, but aimed and targeted against them. It affects the economy and destroys the cultural heritage. Unless nipped in the bud at the earliest, it is likely to cause turbulence shaking of the socio- economic-political system in an otherwise healthy, wealthy, effective and vibrating society.2. The menace of corruption was found to have enormously increased by first and second world war conditions. The corruption, at th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1998KAR3620; 1998(6)KarLJ667; (1999)IILLJ552Kant
K.R. Prasada Rao1. These appeals have been filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos. 5517 and 5518 of 1998, dated 4-3-1998 confirming the ex parte stay order dated 24-2-1998 staying the operation of the order of transfer of respondent 2-Deputy Manager (TTC) from the Technical Training Centre to its Regional Office, Calcutta under Office Memorandum No. FPA TRF 97 384, dated 27-11-1997 issued by the appellant (Annexure-EE to the writ petitions) and rejecting the application filed by the appellant-Company for vacating the stay order dated 24-2-1998.2. The impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge has been challenged by the management of the appellant-Company on two grounds which are (1) the writ petitions filed by the respondents in the writ appeals are not maintainable, as the appellant-Company is not a 'State' or other authority within the sweep of the expression used in Article 12 of the Constitution of India and (2) the order of transfer ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1. All these Writ Petitions are listed before this Bench by a Special Order of the Hon’ble Chief Justice for decision. The subject matter of all these petitions is identical though one of the writ petition is by way of public interest litigation. Therefore, they are taken up for consideration together and disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners in W.P.No. 66920/2010 herein are the member shareholders of the Doodhganga Krishna Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit, Chikkodi. It is a Co-operative sugar factory registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. It was established to cater to the needs of the sugarcane farmers in and around Chikkodi, Raibagh and Athani Taluk in Belgaum District. Later it was converted into a Multi-State Co-operative Society under the Karnataka Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, by extending its area of operation to more than one State (Karnataka and Maharashtra) Earlier, they were having crushing capacity of 2500 TCD...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1990Kant97; 1989(2)KarLJ202
ORDER1. Common prayer in these series is to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to forbear respondents from interfering with their right to excavate, remove and transport granite found in his/their patta land/s.2. Most of the petitioners are from old State of Mysore and a few from Kollegal, which on re-organization has become part and parcel of Mysore District. They trace their right to excavate granite either to proviso to S. 38 of Mysore Land Revenue Code and notification issued thereunder or the Madras Board Standing Order. In support of their prayer, reliance is placed on catena of decisions of this Court to which a reference would be made a little later.3. Respondents in their statement of objections dispute their right to extract minor minerals except in accordance with the Rules framed under S. 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') Specific reference is made to Ch. II of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concessio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU R DATED THIS THE8H DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION No.1167 OF2024(GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: SRI.VINAY RAJASHEKARAPPA KULKARNI, AGED ABOUT54YEARS, MEMBER, LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, KARNATAKA STATE AND RESIDENT OF BARAKOTI SHIVAGIRI, DHARWAD 58 007. PETITIONER (BY SRI.C V NAGESH., SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. K RAGHAVENDRA.,ADVOCATE) AND: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BELLARY ROAD, BENGALURU 560 032. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S V RAJU., ASG A/W SRI. P PRASANNA KUMAR AND SRI. RAHUL REDDY., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE226OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I) CALL FOR RECORDS IN SPL.C.C.NO.565/2021 WHICH IS PRESENTLY PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LXXXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (CCH.NO.82), BENGALURU AND ETC., THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDER, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: - 2 - ORDER Petitioner, a former Cab...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2002CriLJ1362; ILR2002KAR1427; 2002(2)KarLJ548
Mohamed Anwar, J.1. Brijesh Singh, petitioner in Cr. P. No. 2571 of 2001, is A-l in Crime No. 12 of 2001 of Ulsoorgate Women's Police Station booked against him and his four relatives for the offences under Section 498-A read with Section 109, under Section 506 of the IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. on the complaint of his wife Smt. Sharmila. lodged with the police on 11-6-2001. He has filed the petition under Section 439(l)(b) of the Cr. P.C. praying to set aside the order dated 26-7-2001 in Cr. R.P. No. 218 of 2001 passed by the learned Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.2. Petitioner in Cr. P. No. 2639 of 2001 is the said Smt. Sharmila Brijesh Singh, wife of petitioner in Cr. P. No. 2571 of 2001. She has filed her petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. against the State by Ulsoorgate Police, her husband Brijesh Singh and two others with a prayer to set aside the order dated 12-7-2001 of the 6th Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Bang...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1987KAR262
ORDERMurlidher Rao, J.1. Petitioner has filed these two petitions. Common set of facts have given rise to two causes of action. Reliefs asked for are separate but concerning a common transaction.Facts :Petitioner applied for grant of quarry lease in an area of 280 acres in S. No. 421 of Maralkuppa Village in Kanakapura taluk. The application was filed on 3-12-1981, for 'GREY GNEISS'. The Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, being the competent officer, granted by 150 acres and in pursuance thereof, lease deed was executed on 15-5-1982. In the lease deed, the mineral was mentioned as 'GREY GRANITE' instead of 'GREY GNEISS' as sought for by the petitioner. Petitioner commenced his operations.2. After one year, petitioner, realising the discrepancy, applied for rectification of mineral in the lease deed. He contended that he had applied for 'GREY GNEISS' and that is the mineral found in the quarry, therefore, 'GREY GRANITE' which is mentioned in the lease deed, having not been found in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2009(6)KarLJ161
ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. The petitioner in W.P. No. 9553/207 is a Software company and has the benefit of credit facilities with the Corporation Bank for several years and has the enhanced credit limit of Rs. 44.05 crore, which is called Package Credit Limit cum PCFC, overdraft facility, rupee advance against export and various types of term loans. The petitioner had offered title deeds of immovable property as collateral security for repayment of the loan amounts without reducing the terms of such transaction into the form of a document except handing over a letter to that effect, along with executing other loan documents, by paying a stamp duty of 0.5% on the loan amount. The petitioner had again approached the Bank for a loan of Rs. 70 crore in addition to the existing credit limit as on 1.6.2007. This having bean sanctioned by the Bank on certain terms and conditions as evidenced at Annexure-'A' to the writ petition and in furtheran...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2008KAR658; 2008(2)KarLJ558; 2008(1)KCCR211; 2008(2)AIRKarR373
V. Jagannathan, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant on the question of maintainability of this appeal.2. Following the amendment brought to the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, the Karnataka Small Cause Courts Act, 1964, and the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, by the Karnataka Act No. 26 of 2007, which has been published in the Gazette on 28.8.2007, the office has raised an objection with regard to the maintainability of this appeal as the value of the suit property is more than Rs. 1,00,000/-and as such, in view of the change in the pecuniary jurisdiction affected by the amending act, the office has opined that this appeal is not maintainable before this Court.3. The learned Counsel for the appellant Shri Vijay Krishna Bhat submitted that the office objection is not sustainable because once a suit is instituted, it also implies that all the rights of appeal then in force are preserved to the parties thereto till rest of the carrier of the suit and he further contended th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2008(2)KarLJ712; 2007(6)AIRKarR593; 2008CriLJNOC152(DB)
ORDERK.L. Manjunath, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate General for the respondents.2. The matter was earlier heard by us. After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned State Public Prosecutor considering the point involved in this writ petition, we requested the learned Advocate General to assist the Court. Accordingly, he has assisted the Court and argued the matter in detail.3. The petitioner is the wife of one Sadanand Baddi who has been detained under the provisions of the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum-Grabbers Act, 1985. The present petition is filed by the petitioner requesting the Court to declare the detention of her husband Sadanand Baddi, passed by the 1st respondent dated 20th April, 2007 and approved by the 2nd respondent as per Annexure-D, dated 25-4-2007 as illegal and void ab initio.4. The Additional Distinct...
Tag this Judgment!