Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-28-1988
Reported in : [1989(58)FLR568]; (1988)IILLJ233Kant
Prem Chand Jain, C.J.1. S. Visweswaraiah has filed this appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court dated 19th January 1983 by which Writ Petition No. 10062/76 filed by him has been dismissed. 2. The Vanguard Insurance Company Limited with its registered office at Madras was engaged in the business of doing general insurance. The Company has a branch office at Bangalore and the appellant was working as its Manager. On 13th May 1971, the President of India in exercise of the powers conferred by Art. 123(1) of the Constitution, promulgated the General Insurance (Emergency Provisions) Ordinance, 1971, (No. 6 of 1971), (hereinafter referred to as 'the Ordinance'), pending complete nationalisation of general insurance in the country, inter-alia providing for transfer of the management of the undertakings of general insurance to the Central Government. Consequently from 13th May 1971 the business of the Vanguard Insuranc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Oct-06-1988
Reported in : ILR1989KAR1249
Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This matter has come up for admission after notice.2. This is a revision petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 3-2-1988 made by the Civil Judge, Chickmagalur, in Original Suit No. -- of 1988. The order came to be passed on the office objection that the suit was not properly valued.3. The petitioners - plaintiffs filed suit against the respondents - defendants for rendering accounts in respect of the income from three bits of coffee estates left in the management of the defendants for convenience having obtained the said coffee estates to their share under a registered partition deed. The petitioners have stated that the value of the suit for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction was as given in the valuation slip enclosed alongwith the plaint. In the valuation slip, the following is stated:'The suit is for rendition of accounts of the income in the suit land payable to plaintiffs and for a decree on the sum...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-23-1988
Reported in : 1(1989)ACC465
N. Venkatachala, J.1. The claimants in MVC No. 360/81 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, at Mangalore (Dakshina Kannada) had claimed compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- on account of the death of B. Thim-mappashetty who died on 7-8-1981 at about 5 p.m. when he was driving the Scooter bearing No. MXJ 7585. At that time another motor cycle bearing No. MYG 9166 of the First respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent before the Tribunal, came from the opposite side and hit the scooter on which the deceased was going. He sustained fatal injuries and was removed to K.M.C, Hospital at Manipal immediately. In spite of the treatment given to him he succumbed to the injuries on 4-9-1981. He was a clerk in the Syndicate Bank at Manipal and was drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 1,212-97 ps. per month. In course of time he could have drawn monthly salary of Rs. 3,000/-.2. The first respondent owner of the said motor cycle bearing MYG 9166 was himself driving his vehicle when this accident occ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-23-1988
Reported in : ILR1989KAR441; 1989(1)KarLJ490
Hiremath, J.1. The claimants in MVC. No. 360/81 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, at Mangalore (Dakshina Kannada) had claimed compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/-on account of the death of B. Thimmappashetty who died on 7-8-1981 at about 5 p.m. when he was driving the Scooter bearing No. MXJ 7585. At that time another motor cycle bearing No. MYG 9166 of the first respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent before the Tribunal, came from the opposite side and hit the scooter on which the deceased was going. He sustained fatal injuries and was removed to K.M.C. Hospital at Manipal immediately. In spite of the treatment given to him he succumbed to the injuries on 4-9-1981. He was a clerk in the Syndicate Bank at Manipal and was drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 1,212-97ps per month. In course of time he could have drawn monthly salary of Rs. 3,000/-2. The first respondent owner of the said motor cycle bearing MYG 9166 was himself driving his vehicle when this accident occurred. Whil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-11-1988
Reported in : ILR1988KAR2855; (1989)ILLJ245Kant
ORDER1. In this petition presented by the petitioner, the Cashier, in the service of the Karnataka Electricity Board, the following question of law arises for consideration : Whether the Karnataka Electricity Board has no jurisdiction to hold departmental inquiry against the petitioner as a criminal proceeding is also pending against the petitioner before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bagalkot, in respect of some of the charges which also constitute the subjects matter of departmental inquiry ?2. The petition has come up for preliminary hearing after notice to the respondents. By consent of both the Counsel it is taken up for final hearing and is disposed of by this order. 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : On 25th July 1987 the Articles of charges framed against the petitioner by respondent No. 1, who is Specially Empowered Authority, was served on the petitioner. The three charges framed against the petitioner are : (1) That you Sri. R. N. Kalyani, while working as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-20-1988
Reported in : ILR1988KAR3182; 1988(3)KarLJ415
ORDERBopanna, J.1. In these petitions the petitioners have sought for a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant affiliation to the College of Education (B.Ed. College) for the academic year 1987-88. They have also sought for a Writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order of the State Government bearing No-ED. 122 UBC 87 dated 1-9-1987 produced as Annexure-G 1 in Writ Petition No. 18111 of 1987. Since a common point arises for consideration in these petitions, they are disposed of by a common order.2. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 13227 of 1987 in an educational institution registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 and it is not in dispute that this Association is a minority institution which enjoys the protection of Article 40 of the Constitution. It is also not in dispute that this Association is running a number of educational institutions for catering to the needs of persons belonging to the minority community, namely,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-06-1988
Reported in : ILR1988KAR2053; 1988(2)KarLJ310
ORDER1. The petitioner C. N. Seetharam is accused-1 in Cr. No. 1/83 registered in Harihar Police Station for the alleged commission of the offences of forgery of a document and using it as genuine document punishable under sections 465 and 471 r/w 34 IPC. Cr.P. 989/86 has been filed under S. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings including the FIR and the charge sheet, on the file of the J.M.F.C., Harihar, and the writ petition No. 19555/86 has been filed for quashing the sanction accorded by the Government for prosecution (Annexure-A) on the ground that the sanction has been accorded without applying the mind. 2. Few salient facts leading to these petitions as averred and as can be gathered from the materials placed in the two petitions are as follows : On the application in Form No. 7 made by one Ningappa for grant of occupancy right in respect of S. No. 12/A of Nandigavi village, a case bearing No. LRM.TC. 598/76-77 was registered in the Land Tribunal, Harihar. It came to be dispo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-15-1988
Reported in : ILR1988KAR1489; 1989(3)KarLJ212
ORDERKulkarni, J.1. Cr.P.214/85 by the three accused persons is directed against the order dated 7-2-1985 passed by the Special Judge, Belgaum, in S.C.38/85 rejecting the application filed by the accused under Section 167(5).Cr.R.P. 623/87 by the State is directed against the order dated 11-8-87 passed by the Special Judge, Gulbarga, in S.C. 13/87, discharging the accused.Cr.R.P. 624/87 by the State is directed against the order dated 20-8-87 passed by the Special Judge, Gulbarga, in S.C. 19/87 discharging the accused.Cr.R.P. 625/87 by the State is directed against the order dated 27-8-87 passed by the Special Judge, Gulbarga, in S.C. 18/87, discharging the accused.Cr.R.P. 626/87 by the State is directed against the order dated 27-7-87 passed by the Special Judge, Gulbarga, in S.C.17/87, discharging the accused.Cr.R.P.627/87 by the State is directed against the order dated 28-7-87 passed by the Special Judge, Gulbarga, in S.C. 15/87, discharging the accused.Cr.R.P.628/87 by the State i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-26-1988
Reported in : ILR1988KAR3105; 1988(2)KarLJ365
Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The respondents in the Writ Petition are the appellants. The writ petitioner sought the quashing of an order of the second respondent dated 16th June, 1982 whereby the preliminary objection raised by the writ petitioner against the enquiry in respect of the alteration of the date of birth, was overruled. The said enquiry was being held under the provisions of the Karnataka State Servants (Determination of Age) Act, 1974 (for short 'the Act'). The learned single Judge allowed the Writ Petition.2. The facts in brief are:The petitioner was a Government servant and his date of birth was entered as 13-6-1926 in the service register. However, on 31-3-1979 the Director of Public Instructions sent a communication to the petitioner informing him that his date of birth has been ascertained as 13-6-1922 and sought his explanation as to why he should not be retired on the basis of the said ascertained date of birth. This was challenged by the petitioner in an earlier Writ P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-04-1988
Reported in : 1989(1)KarLJ24
ORDERHiremath, J.1. The petitioners herein 36 Members of Dharwad Bar Association against whom process was issued by the order of the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dharwad, dated 29-8-1987 on a private complaint filed by the respondent herein Venkatesh Bhimrao Kulkarni another member of the same Bar. That complaint was for offences under Sections 499, 504 and 506 I.P.C. The operative portion of the order at para-4 reads as follows:-'However, the offence under Sections 499 and 504 I.P.C. are not made out prima facie. The complainant though submitted that the resolution was given a wide publicity in a daily Samyukta Karnataka newspaper and thereby the accused have defamed in the eye of public, same is not produced. Hence, I order to register the case against accused Nos. 2 to 54 for an offence under Section 506(1) I.P.C. Register it and issue summons.'2. Referring to the ingredients of the offences of criminal intimidation as enumerated is Section 503 I.P.C., the Cour...
Tag this Judgment!