Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2008(5)KarLJ18; ILR2008(1)Kar606; 2008(2)KCCR838; 2008(2)AIRKarR537
ORDERS. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. In this case, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the notification at Annexure 'E' dated 19.7.2007 issued by respondent Nos. 3 and 4 whereby tenders have been invited for lease of Ratbag Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamitha, Raibag, Belgaum District, under lease, rehabilitated, operate and transfer (for short 'LROT') basis for a period of 30 (thirty) years starting from the year 2007-08 to 2036-37. The petitioners have also challenged the proceedings of the State Government at Annexure 'G' dated 5.8.2006 whereby the State Government has decided to revive the aforesaid sugar factory by way of lease on the model of Srirama Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Limited and the Government Order at Annexure 'H' dated 16.1.2007 deciding to lease the aforesaid sugar factory for a period of 30 years on LROT basis.2. The petitioners are the shareholders and members of the 4th respondent-Raibag Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamitha, Ratbag. Belgaum District ('for short 's...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
ORDERAravind Kumar, J.1. Both these petitions are filed seeking reliefs claiming interalia therein namely the petitioner in W.P.4653/2007 i.e., Arasikere Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'bank' for the sake of brevity ) calling in question the order dated 31-7-2006 which is at Annexure 'Q' passed by the Common Cadre Committee (hereinafter referred to as the 'CCC' for the sake of brevity) and the order dated 13-12-2006 which is at Annexure 'S' passed by the CCC directing the Bank to pay salary to 3rd respondent for the period 23-4-1997 to 10-10-1997 and the order directing the bank to pay the said amount immediately.2. W.P. No. 19958/2007 is filed by the employee against the CCC and the District Manager, Karnataka State Agricultural and Rural Development Bank (hereinafter referred to as the 'federal society' for the sake of brevity) seeking relief of a mandamus to the respondents to pay the arrears of salary in accordan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
ORDER1. In these writ petitions the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short "the Act') dated 25.9.1986, awards dated 28.1.1989 and 31.1.1989 and notification under Section 16(2) of the Act dated 12/15.4.1991 and 4/5.11.1992 and for other reliefs2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the owners of bits of lands in different survey numbers situated at Kothihosahalli village and Kodigehalli village and Byatarayanapura village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. For the benefit of fourth respondent - Housing Co-operative society the Government of Karnataka issued a preliminary notification on 4.1.1985 proposing to acquire the lands belonging to the petitioners and others.Subsequently on 25.9.1986 the final notification under Section 6(1) of the Act came to be published. Thereafter, the second respondent passed an award on 3.12.1988 and the same came to be ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1. This Regular First Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 17.4.2009 in. O.S.No. 7934/2001 passed by the learned IX Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for declaration of title and injunction and dismissing the counter claim of defendants for decree of permanent injunction. 2, Appellants are defendants 1 to 4, first respondent is the plaintiff and respondents 2 to 8 are defendants 5 to 11 before the Trial Court. In this judgment, for convenience, the parties are referred to as per their status before the Trial Court. Wherever there is underlining, it is ours. 3. It is the case of plaintiff that Sriia Prabhupada, a disciple of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu preached, propogated and spread the philosophy of Krishna Consciousness all over the world, From 1966 and onwards, Srila Prabhupada started a movement under the name and style International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) in New York. Within a short span of time the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2012(3)KCCR2092
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to declare section 2(1)(c)(v) of the Securitisation Act as ultra vires and unconstitutional and strike down as violative of Art. 14 and other provisions of the Constitution of India in so far as petitioners are concerned.)N. KUMAR J.,1. The constitutional validity of item (v) of clause (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 2 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002, for short, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' is the subject matter of W.P.No.2755/08. Further the petitioners in the said writ petition are also seeking for quashing of the notification bearing No.S.O.105 (E) issued by the Central Government, Ministry of Finance and Company Affairs (Department of Economic Affairs) (Banking Division) dated 28th January 2003, where under, the Central Government specifies 'Co-operative Bank' as defined in clause (cci) of Section ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2012(3)KCCR2092
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to declare section 2(1)(c)(v) of the Securitisation Act as ultra vires and unconstitutional and strike down as violative of Art. 14 and other provisions of the Constitution of India in so far as petitioners are concerned.) N. KUMAR J., 1. The constitutional validity of item (v) of clause (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 2 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002, for short, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' is the subject matter of W.P.No.2755/08. Further the petitioners in the said writ petition are also seeking for quashing of the notification bearing No.S.O.105 (E) issued by the Central Government, Ministry of Finance and Company Affairs (Department of Economic Affairs) (Banking Division) dated 28th January 2003, where under, the Central Government specifies 'Co-operative Bank' as defined in clause (cci) of Sectio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
Abdul Nazeer, J 1. The main question for consideration in these writ petitions is whether a Director of a primary Co-operative Society, who represents the said society in a Federal Society ceases to be a member of the Federal Society when he ceases to be the Director of the Co-operative Society which he represents? 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: P. Gadeppa, the petition in W.P.No.62612/2010 is a primary member of Bellary District Central Co-operative Wholesale Stores, Bellary. He was also the elected Director of the said society. He was in the committee of BDCC Bank as a delegate of BDCC Wholesale Stores. He was defeated in the election held to the committee of BDCC Wholesale Stores on 20.3.2010. T.M. Chandrashekariah, the petitioner in W.P.No.62613/2010 is a primary member of Kududarahalu Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha. He was elected as the Director of the said society. He had come to the TAPCMS Ltd., Siraguppa, as a representative of Kududarahalu VSSSN, Siraguppa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
Abdul Nazeer, J 1. The main question for consideration in these writ petitions is whether a Director of a primary Co-operative Society, who represents the said society in a Federal Society ceases to be a member of the Federal Society when he ceases to be the Director of the Co-operative Society which he represents? 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: P. Gadeppa, the petition in W.P.No.62612/2010 is a primary member of Bellary District Central Co-operative Wholesale Stores, Bellary. He was also the elected Director of the said society. He was in the committee of BDCC Bank as a delegate of BDCC Wholesale Stores. He was defeated in the election held to the committee of BDCC Wholesale Stores on 20.3.2010. T.M. Chandrashekariah, the petitioner in W.P.No.62613/2010 is a primary member of Kududarahalu Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha. He was elected as the Director of the said society. He had come to the TAPCMS Ltd., Siraguppa, as a representative of Kududarahalu VSSSN, Siraguppa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1. The petitioner has sought for quashing the averments of PCR No.27/2011 as they relate to petitioner herein and setting aside the order dated 03.12.2011. passed under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in PCR No.27/2011. referring the complaint to Additional Director General of police. Lokayukta, for investigation and quashing first information report in Crime No.63/2011, registered by Lokayukta police as they relate to petitioner herein. 2. I have heard Sri Uday U.Lalit. learned senior counsel for petitioner. Sri S.G.Rajendra Reddy. learned counsel for I-respondent/Lokayukta police and II respondent/party-in- person Sri T.J.Abraham. 3. The brief facts necessary for decision of this petition are as follows:- A complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. in PCR No.27/2011 was tiled in the court of learned Special Judge at Bangalore, against the petitioner amongst others, alleging offences punishable under sections 13(l)(d) 13(l)(e) & section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1988. offences punis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
(Prayer: Writ Appeal Filed U/S 4 of The Karnataka High Court Act Praying To Set Aside The Order Passed In The Writ Petition No. 4834/2007 Dated 28.09.2007) 1. Appellants are owners of some parcels of lands notified initially u/s 3(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 (for short the Act) as per notification No. CI 565 SPQ 2006, Bangalore, dated 06.12.2006 (copy at Annexure-A) and published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 08.12.2006 declaring it as an industrial area for the purpose of the Act. Simultaneously, another notification of even date was issued u/s 1 (3) of the Act indicating that the provisions of Chapter 7 of this Act was made applicable and the statutory provisions provided for in this Chapter for acquisition and disposal of land so notified will be put into operation. 2. The third notification also came to be issued simultaneously on the very date u/s 28 (1) of the Act indicating that the very lands are required for the purpose of establishing industries...
Tag this Judgment!