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
(Prayer: This RFA is filed under sec.96 of CPC., against the Judgment and decree dt:28.09.2015 passed in OS No.281/2011 on the file of the XLIV Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengalure (CCH-45), partly allowing the suit for recovery of money.) 1. Since common question of law and facts are involved in all these cases, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The above appeals and cross objections arise out of common judgment and decrees dated 28.09.2015 in O.S.No.213, 214 and 281/2011 passed by the IV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. By impugned judgment, the trial Court allowed applications of the plaintiff under Order 12 Rule 6 of CPC and decreed all the three suits for the amount mentioned as below: O.S. No.213/2011- Rs.21,59,213/- O.S. No.214/2011- Rs.6,97,862/- O.S. No.281/2011- Rs.29,69,497/- Further, the trial court rejected the claim of the plaintiff for interest at 18% p.a. 3. Sri.P.Muralidharan s/o G Parthasarthy is ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1991KAR1371; 1991(1)KarLJ500
Mohan, C.J.1. All these Writ Appeals and the Writ Petition can be dealt with under a common Judgment since the point involved is one and the same, namely, whether R.M.A. rubber sheets of various grades could be called forest produce within the meaning of Section 2(7) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as it stood prior to Amendment Act No. 10 of 1989.2. The facts in W. A.No.526 of 1989 would be enough to dispose of these cases. Hence, we propose to take up W.A.No.526 of 1989 first. This Writ Appeal is against the Judgment in W.P.No.23718 of 1981. Respondent 1 is a Company engaged in the manufacture of tread rubber. It negotiated with the State of Karnataka appellant-1 herein, for supply of 60 tonnes of natural rubber of Grade RMA I to V per month for a period of five years upto 31-3-1984 subject to certain conditions.The Government of India on 17th April 1979, in exercise pf the powers under Section 13 of the Rubber Act, 1947, fixed the minimum price...
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 : ILR1988KAR457; 1988(1)KarLJ249
K.A. Swami, J.1. R.F.A.No. 14/1978 is filed by the plaintiff and R.F.A. No. 48/1976 is filed by the defendants. In this Judgment the parties will be referred to with reference to the position assigned to them in the trial Court. As both the appeals arise out of the same suit, they are disposed of by this common Judgment.2. O.S.No. 94/1972 was filed by the plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs. 48,409-06 being the amount due towards the work contract entrusted to it under Ex.P. 10. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendants illegally terminated the contract and illegally forfeited the earnest money deposit and also failed to pay the amount towards the work done under the contract Ex.P. 10. Therefore, under all the heads together, the plaintiff prayed for a decree for recovery of the aforesaid sum.3. The defendants disputed the claim made by the plaintiff and contended that the contract was terminated in accordance with the provisions contained therein ; that the plaintiff failed t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
R1IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE19H DAY OF JANUARY, 2021 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR AND THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL W.P. NO.47747/2017 C/W W.P.NOs.433/2017, 10728/2017, 15532/2017, 16281/2017, 17180/2017, 21279/2017, 23095/2017, 23800/2017, 25219/2017, 27437/2017, 27573/2017, 32134/2017, 32849/2017, 33085/2017, 34202/2017, 35384/2017, 36324/2017, 36610/2017, 36640/2017, 36690/2017, 36760/2017, 37713/2017, 40597/2017, 41593/2017, 42959/2017, 43059/2017, 43227/2017, 44273/2017, 44687/2017, 45114/2017, 47887/2017, 50674/2017, 51160/2017, 52972/2017, 53008/2017, 54035/2017, 54081/2017, 54082/2017, 55683/2017, 56296/2017, 235/2018, 463/2018, 777/2018, 1348/2018, 1395/2018, 3032/2018, 3641/2018, 4729/2018, 5389/2018, 5390/2018, 5391/2018, 5704/2018, 6061/2018, 6330/2018, 6376/2018, 6583/2018, 6960/2018, 7868/2018, 8035/2018, 8186/2018, 8187/2018, 8189/2018, 8190/2018, 8191/2018, 8210/2018, 8585/2018, 9116/2018, 9117/2018, 9194/2018, 11029/2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
R1IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE19H DAY OF JANUARY, 2021 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR AND THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL W.P. NO.47747/2017 C/W W.P.NOs.433/2017, 10728/2017, 15532/2017, 16281/2017, 17180/2017, 21279/2017, 23095/2017, 23800/2017, 25219/2017, 27437/2017, 27573/2017, 32134/2017, 32849/2017, 33085/2017, 34202/2017, 35384/2017, 36324/2017, 36610/2017, 36640/2017, 36690/2017, 36760/2017, 37713/2017, 40597/2017, 41593/2017, 42959/2017, 43059/2017, 43227/2017, 44273/2017, 44687/2017, 45114/2017, 47887/2017, 50674/2017, 51160/2017, 52972/2017, 53008/2017, 54035/2017, 54081/2017, 54082/2017, 55683/2017, 56296/2017, 235/2018, 463/2018, 777/2018, 1348/2018, 1395/2018, 3032/2018, 3641/2018, 4729/2018, 5389/2018, 5390/2018, 5391/2018, 5704/2018, 6061/2018, 6330/2018, 6376/2018, 6583/2018, 6960/2018, 7868/2018, 8035/2018, 8186/2018, 8187/2018, 8189/2018, 8190/2018, 8191/2018, 8210/2018, 8585/2018, 9116/2018, 9117/2018, 9194/2018, 11029/2...
Tag this Judgment!