Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, GULBARGA BENCH R DATED THIS THE31T DAY OF JULY, 2014 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY BEFORE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31375/2010 C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31371/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31372/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31373/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31376/2010 MFA313752010 BETWEEN: The Managing Director Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, K.H. Road, Bangalore. Divisional Office, Bijapur Represented by its Chief Law Officer, NEKRTC, Gulbarga. APPELLANT (Shri Subhash Mallapur, Advocate) AND: Mallappa S/o Shankerappa Uppar Age:20. years, Occupation: Coolie, 2 R/o Balaganur Taluka: Sindagi District: Bijapur Now residing at Ibrahimpura Bijapur. RESPONDENT This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgement and Award dated 10.12.2009 passed in MVC No.1316/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.XII at Bijapur, partly allowing t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, GULBARGA BENCH R DATED THIS THE31T DAY OF JULY, 2014 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY BEFORE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31375/2010 C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31371/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31372/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31373/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31376/2010 MFA313752010 BETWEEN: The Managing Director Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, K.H. Road, Bangalore. Divisional Office, Bijapur Represented by its Chief Law Officer, NEKRTC, Gulbarga. APPELLANT (Shri Subhash Mallapur, Advocate) AND: Mallappa S/o Shankerappa Uppar Age:20. years, Occupation: Coolie, 2 R/o Balaganur Taluka: Sindagi District: Bijapur Now residing at Ibrahimpura Bijapur. RESPONDENT This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgement and Award dated 10.12.2009 passed in MVC No.1316/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.XII at Bijapur, partly allowing t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, GULBARGA BENCH R DATED THIS THE31T DAY OF JULY, 2014 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY BEFORE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31375/2010 C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31371/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31372/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31373/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31376/2010 MFA313752010 BETWEEN: The Managing Director Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, K.H. Road, Bangalore. Divisional Office, Bijapur Represented by its Chief Law Officer, NEKRTC, Gulbarga. APPELLANT (Shri Subhash Mallapur, Advocate) AND: Mallappa S/o Shankerappa Uppar Age:20. years, Occupation: Coolie, 2 R/o Balaganur Taluka: Sindagi District: Bijapur Now residing at Ibrahimpura Bijapur. RESPONDENT This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgement and Award dated 10.12.2009 passed in MVC No.1316/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.XII at Bijapur, partly allowing t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, GULBARGA BENCH R DATED THIS THE31T DAY OF JULY, 2014 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY BEFORE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31375/2010 C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31371/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31372/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31373/2010 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.31376/2010 MFA313752010 BETWEEN: The Managing Director Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, K.H. Road, Bangalore. Divisional Office, Bijapur Represented by its Chief Law Officer, NEKRTC, Gulbarga. APPELLANT (Shri Subhash Mallapur, Advocate) AND: Mallappa S/o Shankerappa Uppar Age:20. years, Occupation: Coolie, 2 R/o Balaganur Taluka: Sindagi District: Bijapur Now residing at Ibrahimpura Bijapur. RESPONDENT This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgement and Award dated 10.12.2009 passed in MVC No.1316/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.XII at Bijapur, partly allowing t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Learned Fast Track Court-III at Gulbarga in S.C. No.283/2005 dated 28.06.2007, which is at Annexure (A, in view of the reasons as stated above in the interest of justice and equity.) 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor and have perused the record. 2. It was the case of the prosecution that on the intervening night of 5th and 6th August 2005, the Complainant,Channabasappa, of Najirapura, Yadgir taluk, Gulbarga District and his grandson had camped on their field to water their paddy crop during the night. The complainant's wife, Maliamma, was said to be alone at home. It is said that the accused, the appellants herein, with a common intention to commit theft, had trespassed in to the house of the complainant, and after having gained ent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 01.03.2014 in (Language) and the order dated 11.04.2014 bearing No.H.D.141 SST 2014 passed by the 2nd and 1st respondent respectively, produced as Annexures-A and E respectively and set free Teek Raj from illegal detention at Raichur District Prison immediately.) 1. Parents of Teek Raj have filed this petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus alleging that on false allegations, due to political rivalry and also on account of instigation ofpersons who were inimical to their son, Teek Raj has been illegally detained by the respondents. 2. The Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Raichur, has passed the detention order dated 01.03.2014 exercising his power under the provisions of the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug- offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slub-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA GULBARGA BENCH R DATED THIS THE23D DAY OF JULY, 2014 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL AND THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY WPHC No.200008/2014 BETWEEN:1. Mallikarjun S/o Amatheppa Age:58. years Occ: Agriculture 2. Channamma W/o Mallikarjun Age:50. years Occ: Household work Both are resident of No.1/2/32 Patel Wadi, Sindhanur Dist. Raichur (By Sri Basavaraj R. Math, Advocate) AND:1. The State of Karnataka By its Additional Secretary PETITIONERS2(Law and Order) Home Department Vidhana Soudha Bangalore 2. Deputy Commissioner And District Magistrate Raichur District, Raichur RESPONDENTS (By Sri Manvendra Reddy, Government Advocate) This Writ Petition is filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, in No.fCg/JAJf/UAP/93/2013-14 and the order dated 11.04.2014 order dated 01.03.2014 quashing the bearing No.H.D.141 SST2014passed by the 2nd and 1st respondent respectively, produc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
(Prayer: These Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to, issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, direction, order of similar nature whereby quashing the impugned decision Annexure-A dated 24.4.2014 Bearing No.MPG/NKUSIP/STP/TENDER/BECM/14-15-38, taken by respondent No.2 whereby respondent No.2 rejected the technical bid of the petitioner relating to project in question and further the decision to oust of the petitioner from the zone of consideration and etc.) 1. Petitioners 1 and 2 claim to have a joint venture agreement. Respondent No.2 invited bids for carrying out the work of Design, Supply, Installation, Commissioning and Operation and Maintenance of 40 MLD Sewage Treatment Plant (SBR)/CASP Process Plant at Nandikoor in Gulbarga City as per Notification dated 24.05.2013. As per the tender conditions contained in the bid document at Clause 2.4.2(a) with regard to experience of the bidders for participation, it is stipulated that th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
(Prayer: This Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned notices bearing o.SAM/KAM/CHUNAVANE/12/2014-15 in Form-2, dated 21.06.2014 by respondent No.3 alleged to have issued to the petitioners vide Annexures-D, D1 to D3 and issue a direction to the respondent No.3 to issue notices afresh and conduct meeting of No Confidence as per law.) 1. Petitioners are members of the Gram Panchayat, Sirawara village, Manvi Taluk, Raichur District. They are challenging the action of the respondent-Authority in convening the meeting of the Gram Panchayat, to consider the No-confidence Motion moved against the Adhyaksha of the Gram Panchayat. 2. The twin contentions urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioners are, that the impugned notices issued by the 3rd respondent were not served on the petitioners and although they purport to bear the signatures of the petitioners, the said signatures have been forged. The second contention is, that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
(Prayer: This Miscellaneous First Appeal Is Filed Under Section 173(1) Of Motor Vehicle Act, Against The Judgment And Award Dated 20.10.2011 Passed In Mvc No.211/2009 On The File Of The Senior Civil Judge And Motor Accident Claims Tribunal At Humnabad, Wherein Partly Allowing The Claim Petition And Seeking Enhancement Of Compensation.) 1. This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act, against the judgment and award dated 20.10.2011 passed in MVC No.211/2009 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Humnabad, partly allowing the claim petition and seeking for enhancement of compensation. 2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the appellants as well as the learned counsel for the respondent No.2, this matter is heard on merits. The material placed before this Court is sufficient to dispose of the matter at this stage. 3. Parties will be referred to with reference to the status in the claims tribunal. 4. The appellants have produced the copies ...
Tag this Judgment!