Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-05-2015
(Prayer: This Petition Is Filed Under Section 115 Of Cpc Against The Order Dated 20.10.2011 Passed On I A.No. 1 In R.A.No. /2010 On The File Of The Prl. Sr.Civil Judge and Cjm, Mangalore, Allowing Ia No.1 Filed Under Section. 5 Of Limitation Act.) 1. I have heard the arguments of Sriyuths G.Krishnamurthy and Srivatsa, learned Senior Advocates appearing for petitioner and respondents respectively. 2. Perused the order dated 20.10.2011 passed by Sr.Civil Judge, Mangalore in allowing I.A.No.I on cost of Rs.2,000/- in unnumbered R.A. of 2010 (now said to have been numbered as 75/2014). 3. Facts in brief which has led to filing of this appeal are as under. 4. Plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction in O.S No. 111/1997 in respect of suit schedule property against defendants. Said suit came to be decreed by judgment and decree dated 23.07.1998. Being aggrieved by said judgment and decree, an appeal came to be filed under Section 96 of CPC. Since, said appeal was belatedly filed namely...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-05-2015
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE5H DAY OF JANUARY, 2015 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.318/2012 ... PETITIONER BETWEEN: MR M RATHNAVARMA PADIVAL S/O LATE M N PADIVAL AGED ABOUT80YEARS MEHAR BUNGLOW, BALMATTA MANGALORE-575 001. (BY SRI.K CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE) AND:1. MRS. M SHARADA R HEGDE2 MRS. M. SRIDEVI A SHETTY AGED ABOUT42YEARS W/O DR. RAJESH HEGDE NMC HOSPITAL P.O BOX NO.6222, ABUDHABI U.A.E. W/O MR. ANIL PRASAD SHETTY VINAYA, 4163, 1ST FLOOR, 8TH CROSS A MAIN HAL2D STAGE BANGALORE. LOCAL ADDRESS OF R1 COSMOS LANE, KADRI TEMPLE ROAD MANGALORE. 2 AGED ABOUT39YEARS W/O MR. NISHIKANTH SEMITHA NO.3, BUGATTI COURT MILL PARK, VICTORIA AUSTRALIA-3082 NO.1 TO4ARE REPRSENTED BY THEIR GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. KUMAR CHIKKAPPA ALVA AGED ABOUT30YEARS S/O U.T. ALVA KAVIRAJ, KADRI KAMBLA, D.K-575 001.3. MRS. SHIBANI T SHETTY W/O TILAK DAS SHETTY NO.402, THRISANDYA APARTMENT DADA SAHEB PALKE ROAD DADAR EAST, MU...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: % 10.09.2014 06.01.2015 W.P.(C) 43/2014 PRAMOD RAMJEE SAHARE ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner-in-person versus UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Malaya Kumar Chand & Mr.Prateek Tushan Mohanty, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The present Writ Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the order dated 18.07.2013 passed in O.A. No.3551/2011 by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (CAT/ Tribunal), whereby the Tribunal disallowed his said original application. The Petitioner had sought to assail the adverse entries in his Annual Confidential Report (ACR) for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08 and had sought a direction that these entries be ignored by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for consideration of his promotion to the Functiona...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: % 10.09.2014 06.01.2015 W.P.(C) 43/2014 PRAMOD RAMJEE SAHARE ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner-in-person versus UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Malaya Kumar Chand & Mr.Prateek Tushan Mohanty, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The present Writ Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the order dated 18.07.2013 passed in O.A. No.3551/2011 by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (CAT/ Tribunal), whereby the Tribunal disallowed his said original application. The Petitioner had sought to assail the adverse entries in his Annual Confidential Report (ACR) for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08 and had sought a direction that these entries be ignored by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for consideration of his promotion to the Functiona...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-06-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE TUESDAY, THE6H DAY OF JANUARY201516TH POUSHA, 1936 WA.NO. 1574 OF2014() --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED1710-2014 IN WP(C).NO.17607/2014. ....... APPLICANTS/RESPONDENTS1AND2IN WP(C).: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.2. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.ROSHEN D.ALEXANDER. RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & ADDL. RESPONDENTS3TO5IMPLEADED IN WP(C). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MUSLIM EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, PROF. P.O.J.LABBA, PIN-673 004.2. DR.P.A. FAZAL GAFOOR, S/O. LATE DR.P.K...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-06-2015
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5983 OF2007Union of India & Anr. ... Appellants VERSUS S.N. Maity & Anr. ...Respondents JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.In this appeal, by special leave, the justifiability and soundness of the judgment and order dated 18.5.2006 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in W.P.(Service) No.6106 of 2005 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court has overturned the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal ('tribunal' for short), Circuit Bench at Ranchi in O.A. No.215 of 2005, is called in question.2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts which are requisite to be stated are that the 1st respondent was working as a Scientist E-II in the Central Mining Research Institute (Council of Scientific and Industrial Research). On 29.07.2003, he was appointed on deputation to the post of Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks ( (for short, 'CGPDTM'). After serving there for one year, by order F.N...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-06-2015
N.K. Gupta,J: 1. The appellants have preferred the present appeal being aggrieved with the judgment dated 3.1.2005 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad in ST No.44/2003 whereby they have been convicted of the offences under Section 302/34 and Section 324/34 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. No separate sentence was passed for the offence under Section 324 of IPC. 2. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 4.8.2002 at about 9:00 PM, victim Gladvin along with his son deceased Gadvin and daughter-in-law Monika (PW-2) was present in his house situated at Deshbanhupura (Police Station Itarsi District Hoshangabad). At about 9:15 PM two patients had knocked the door of victim Gladvin and asked about the address of appellant No.l Mabel Harry. Victim Gladvin gave the address of appellant No.l to those patients. However, after a few minutes, appellant No.l visited the house of victim Gladvin and started quarrelling on the pretext that the complainant had prohi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-07-2015
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the award dated 30.12.2005 passed by the Court of Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore in Industrial Dispute No.37/2001 vide Annexure-A. ) C.A.V. Judgment : D.H. Waghela, CJ. 1. The petitioner, management of National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL), has challenged the award dated 30-12-2005 of the Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru in I.D.No.37/2001, directing regularization of services of 24 workmen from the date of reference, with appropriate pay scales. 2. The petitioner is stated to be a constituent unit of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), New Delhi which is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and actively engaged in research and development work in science and technology area of aerospace. The petitioner is stated to be undertaking sponsored projects of the Government and other public and private institutions on commercial basis. Regular emplo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-07-2015
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE7h DAY OF JANUARY2015R PRESENT THE HON' BLE MR.D.H.WAGHELA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL.R.B. W.P. No.9974/2006 (L-TER) BETWEEN: The Management of National Aerospace Laboratories, Kodihalli Campus, BANGALORE 560 017 by its Director. (By Sri S.N.Murthy, Sr.counsel a/w Sri G.Lakshmeesh Rao, Adv.) AND :1. Engineering & General Workers Union, No.2, Mill Corner, Sampige Road, Malleshwaram, BANGALORE 560 003 by its Secretary.2. The Managing Director ...PETITIONER M/s. NALTECH Pvt. Ltd. T.S.Building, Kodihalli, BANGALORE 560 017 (By Sri V.R.Datar a/w Sri K.B.Narayana Swamy, Advs. for M/s. M.C.Narasimhan Associates, Advs. for caveator/R-1; Sri Ramchandran, Adv. for M.R.C.Ravi, Adv. for R-2) ...RESPONDENTS - 2 - This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the award dated 30.12.2005 passed by the Court of Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore in Industrial Disp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-09-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:9. h January, 2015 % + I.A. No.24863/2014 IN CS(OS) 3812/2014 NOVARTIS AG & ANR Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr.Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Hemant Singh, Ms.Mamta R.Jha, Ms.Shilpa Arora & Mr.Talha Rahman, Advs. versus CIPLA LTD Through ..... Defendant Mr.P.Chidambaram, Sr. Adv., Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr.Adv. and Mrs.Prathiba M. Singh, Sr.Adv. with Ms.Bitika Sharma, Ms.Anusuya Nigam & Mr.Vihan Dang, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of patent no.222346 granted under The Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in favour of plaintiff No.1, rendition of accounts/damages, delivery-up etc. By this order I propose to decide the application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC.2. Two plaintiffs have filed the present suit against Cipla Ltd. The plaintiff No.1 (the expression include...
Tag this Judgment!