Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1998(5)KarLJ199
ORDER1. The petitioner by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for issuance of writ, order or direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularisation and for reallotment of the sites in question and to reallot the sites in question in favour of the petitioner and to issue possession certificates to the petitioners and to cancel or withdraw the sites granted in favour of respondents 2 and 3. Petitioner has further prayed for grant of such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit.2. Petitioner in the writ petition has stated that she has purchased a revenue site bearing No. 3 measuring 40' x 36' formed in Sy. No. 15/2 of Kathriguppa Village under registered sale deed dated 10-4-1974 from her vendor Smt. B.N. Suguna for valuable consideration. She has asserted that from the date of purchase of aforementioned site, petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said site. Petitioner's case is that her n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999(2)KarLJ625
ORDER1. An officer of the respondent Vijaya Bank is before this Court aggrieved by the orders made by the Appellate Authority dated 17-9-1991 in confirming the orders made by the Disciplinary Authority dated 27-12-1990. By the said order the Disciplinary Authority imposed certain punishments as provided under C and D Regulations of the Bank.2. Briefly the background facts are:While working as Branch Manager of the respondent-Bank, petitioner was served with a charge memo dated 6-2-1989. In that it was alleged that while working as an officer at various branches of the Bank in Bangalore, as a Branch Manager in Keshavapura Branch, Hobli and at West Maredpally Branch, Secunderabad between the period 15-4-1980 and 24-2-1987, petitioner had committed grave official misconduct and failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty and acted in a manner unbecoming of a public servant, inasmuch as, he had amassed wealth disproportionate to all his known sources of income by corrupt and or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1998KAR2021
S.R. Bannurmath, J.1. The findings of the learned Single Judge in respect of applicability of Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act to the B.D.A. proceedings has been mainly challenged in this appeal by the Bangalore Development Authority.2. The brief facts necessary for consideration are as follows:-Respondent No. 1 is a Society and respondent No. 2 is the Hospital run fey it. The land in dispute Sy.No.80 measuring 10 acres of Tavare kerel village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluka belongs to respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein. For the formation and implementation of Byrasandra Thavarakere Madivala Scheme (B.T.M.) under a preliminary notification dated 19.9.1977 under Section 17(1) & (3) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act (B.D.Act for short), the said land was proposed for acquisition by the B.D.A. Pursuant to this, final notification under Section 19(1) of the B.D.A. Act is issued on 7.2.1978. Though no objections were filed by respondent Nos. 1. and 2, on receipt of notices u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1998KAR3817
ORDERH.L. Dattu, J. 1. An Officer of the Respondent-Vijaya Bank is before this Court aggrieved by the orders made by the Appellate Authority dt.17.9.91 in confirming the orders made by the Disciplinary Authority dt.27.12.90. By the said order the Disciplinary Authority imposed certain punishments as provided under C & D Regulations of the Bank.2. Briefly the background facts are:While working as Branch Manager of the respondent Bank, petitioner was served with a charge memo dt.6.2.89. In that it was alleged that while working as an Officer at various branches of the Bank in Bangalore, as a Branch Manager in Keshavapura Branch, Hobli and at West Maredpaly Branch, Secunderabad between the period 15.4.1980 and 24.2.1987, petitioner has committed grave official misconduct and failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty and acted in a manner unbecoming of a public servant, in as much as, he had amassed wealth disproportionate to all his known sources of income by corrupt and or ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1998Kant288; ILR1998KAR1637; 1998(3)KarLJ47
G.C. Bharuka, J.1. The short question involved in this appeal is as to whether the resolution dated 26-2-1993 passed by the respondent-Agricultural Produce Market Committee purporting to cancel the allotment/sale of Site No. 9 in Block 'H', measuring 60' x 120' of Sy. No. 1 in Srigandha Kavalu, Kasaba Hobli, Shimoga City, being the notified market yard, can be held to be legally permissible on the part of the said Market Committee. Since the learned Single Judge by his impugned order has answered the said question in the affirmative, therefore, the present appeal by the writ petitioner.2. The respondent-Market Committee has been established under Section 9 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (in short 'the APMC Act') having the jurisdiction over the entire market area of Shimoga. It is now an accomplished fact that as provided under the provisions of the Act the said Market Committee has been established for ensuring better regulation of buying and se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1998(4)KarLJ550
ORDER1. Since the questions of law urged in these petitions are common and the facts are fairly similar, all these petitions are taken up together for hearing and disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners, in these petitions, are the owners of various items of lands/sites situated at Hyderali Road, Nazarbad Mohalla, Chamundi Vihar, Mysore. 3. In these petitions, they have prayed for quashing the notification dated 29th of April 1997 issued under sub-section (1) of Section 4 read with sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). A copy of the said notification has been produced as Annexure-H in Writ Petition Nos. 14745 to 14747 of 1997. 4. Lands in all measuring 8130.62 sq. mtrs., are sought to be acquired by the respondents for the purpose of 'Sports Complex' known as 'Chamundi Vihar Sports Complex' situated at Mysore, It is not in dispute that a Sports Complex has already been established and the lands in question are sit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999CriLJ958
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The appellant before us was charged with having committed the murder of one Venkataswamy with a pickaxe at about 2.15 p.m. on 7-1-1993 at Hippaneralekeri village. It is alleged that the deceased Venkataswamy who owned the adjoining field to that of the accused was accompanied by PW-1 on that afternoon and that the electricity which fed the water pump tripped. Venkataswamy suspected that the accused was responsible for this and therefore, went to his field near the pump house of the accused ostensibly to investigate into the matter. The version of PW-1 is that he heard a cry from Venkataswamy and therefore, rushed there when he saw the accused inflicting a blow with the pickaxe on the head of the deceased. The accused is supposed to have immediately thrown the weapon there, got on to his TVS moped and left the place. PW-1 states that the deceased struggled for a brief period of time and died on the spot. PW-2 states that he was passing by that side and that the cry o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1998KAR2313; 1998(4)KarLJ186
1. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration that the plaintiffs and their family are entitled both by custom and by hereditary right to the perquisite of performing the panchakajjaya seva attached to the office of Keelu Shanti Archakas in the 1st defendant temple and for consequential relief of a perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant temple, its trustees and all persons claiming through or under them from interfering in any way with the performance of panchakajjaya seva by them. They also sought for setting aside the order of the 4th defendant (Commissioner of H.R. and C.E.) Bangalore, dated 11-9-1969 and also for ancillary relief.2. The material allegations are that the 1st defendant is an ancient Hindu Public Temple situated in Maravanthe village of Kundapura Taluk in Dakshina Kannada District. It is one of the oldest temple and governed under the provisions of Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : I(1999)ACC311; 2001ACJ18; 1998(6)KarLJ290
1. This appeal arises from the judgment and award dated 3-10-1991 delivered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City, awarding Rs. 25,500/- as compensation together with costs and interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment within three months. It further ordered that out of the award amount, a sum of Rs. 2,500/- with full interest and costs should be paid to next friend of the petitioner to meet the medical and other expenses and the balance of the amount awarded shall be deposited in Fixed Deposit in the name of the petitioner-respondent 1 in some nationalised Bank during the minority of the petitioner and the next friend of the petitioner being the natural guardian is entitled to withdraw the interest accruing on said deposit. The Tribunal made the appellants i.e., the owner and driver of the vehicle to be liable to pay the amount of compensation. The owner and driver having felt aggrieved from the award, have come up before this ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2000ACJ508; ILR1999KAR2086; 2000(4)KarLJ114
ORDER1. This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company to challenge the judgment and award dated 19-10-1993 in Motor Vehicles Case No. 547 of 1989 passed by the District Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karwar, Uttara Kannada (henceforth in brief as 'MACT'). In passing the same, the MACT had awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,15,000/- as against the claim of Rs. 3,00,000/- by the respondent 2-owner. The appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company on the ground that its liability would have been restricted to Rs. 50,000/- in terms of the insurance policy.2. I heard the learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company, Sri Yoganarasimha. The respondent 1 is represented by Sri V.P. Kulkarni. The respondent 2 having been served with notice had remained absent. The respondent 3-claimant is represented by Sri B.S. Hadimani. I have also perused the case records.3. The learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company, Sri Yoganarasimha while taking me through the facts of the...
Tag this Judgment!