Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: karnataka Year: 2005 Page 5 of about 95 results (0.007 seconds)

Jan 07 2005 (HC)

Alliance Business Academy, Rep. by Its Director Vs. Dr. H. Jayaram Red ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-07-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR450; 2005(2)KarLJ17

s.r. nayak, j.1. all these appeals are directed against the order of a learned single judge of this court dated 28th may, 2003 passed in writ petition nos. 39079 and 39344 of 2002. writ appeal nos. 5211-5212 of 2003 are preferred by m/s. alliance business academy 4th respondent in the writ petitions. writ appeal nos. 4980 and 5596 of 2003 are preferred by sri gundappa b angoor, 3rd respondent in the writ petitions. writ appeal nos. 5488 and 5489 of 2003 are preferred by m/s. h. jayaram reddy and vinod kumar bansal who are the writ petitioners. inasmuch as the questions of law and that of facts arising for decision in these writ appeals are common and since all the writ appeals are directed against the same common judgment of the learned single judge, all these writ appeals are clubbed and heard together and they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. for the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the writ petitions. the petitioners in writ petition nos. 39079 and 39344 of 2002 are the residents of dollar scheme layout in madiwada, bangalore, and they, in the writ petitions, sought for a writ of mandamus to the bangalore mahanagara palike (bmp) and bangalore development authority (bda) for revoking the sanctioned plan and for a direction to demolish the building constructed in the two sites owned by the 3rd respondent. the petitioners subsequently sought for quashing of the 'special permission' granted by the bda to establish a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 2005 (HC)

Bharatiya Samskrithi Vidya Peeta Vs. the Secretary to the Government o ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-04-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR1234; 2005(2)KarLJ147

n.k. sodhi, c.j.1. 5th respondent is an employee of the bharatiya samskrithi vidya peeta which is running a primary school in which this respondent is working as teacher. the school was receiving grant-in-aid from the state government which was subsequently withdrawn because the management had allegedly violated some of the conditions on which the grant had been sanctioned. after the withdrawal of the grant-in-aid the management did not pay the salary to the 5th respondent at par with the salary of a government school teacher. she then approached the state government by filing a petition under section 133 of the karnataka education act, 1983. that petition was allowed by an order dated 8th february, 2000 and a direction was issued to the government to pay salary to the 5th respondent at par with the salary of government school teachers. feeling aggrieved by this order the management filed writ petition no. 25112 of 2000 in this court. that writ petition was dismissed by the learned single judge on 31st july, 2000 with a direction to the management to pay the salary to the 5th respondent equivalent to that of a teacher in a government school. it is against this order that the present writ appeal has been filed.2. we have heard the learned counsels for the parties and are of the view that there is no merit in the writ appeal. admittedly, the appellant before us is running a private primary school which is a recognised institution which was initially receiving grant-in-aid. as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 2005 (HC)

North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation (Nwkrtc), by Its Manag ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-22-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR1694; [2006]144STC167(Kar)

orderabdul nazeer, j.1. petitioners have called in question the notices issued under section 14 of the karnataka sales act, 1957 (for short 'kst act') whereby the second respondent has directed the petitioners to pay the amount held by them as 'security deposit' of the 3rd respondent towards his tax arrears.2. the first petitioner is a road transport corporation established under the provisions of the road transportation corporation act, 1950 and the second respondent is its divisional controller. the petitioner has established refreshment counters and other commercial establishments in its various bus- stands. in the bus-stand at mudhol, the first petitioner was granted licence to run a refreshment room for a period of six years commencing from 8.11.1999 on a monthly licence fee of rs. 15,800/- for the first year with escalation of 10% every year thereafter. the licence so granted would expire on 7.8.2005. similarly, the first petitioner has granted another licence to the third respondent for running a refreshment room at jamkhandi bus-stand for a period of six years commencing from 20.6.2002 on a monthly licence fee of rs. 28,500/- for the first year with escalation of 10% every year thereafter. the general standing orders of the corporation provides for collection of security deposit from the licensees of commercial establishments for the due performance of the terms and conditions of the agreement of licence. the agreements entered into for the said purpose are at .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 2005 (HC)

Syed Abdul Salam and ors. Vs. the Chief Executive Officers, Karnataka ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-17-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR2084; 2005(4)KarLJ314

orderbhakthavatsala, j.1. this revision petition is directed against order dated 6.11.2003 made in application no. 3/2003 on the file of karnataka wakf tribunal, bangalore division, bangalore (in short, the 'k w t') dismissing the application seeking cancellation, of the election held to the managing committee of shah inayath & jamia mosque, gouribidanur taluk, on 5.1.2003.2. the respondent no. 1 is represented by sri d l n rao, learned counsel. respondent no. 2 has been deleted. respondent nos. 3 ro 23 are represented by sri prabhuling k navadagi.3. heard arguments of the learned counsels for the parties on the point of maintainability of the revision petition.4. sri tanveer pasha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that though the revision petition has been filed under section 115 of the code of civil procedure read with section 83(9) of the wakf act, 1995 (in short, 'the act'), it may be treated as revision petition filed under section 83(9) of the act.5. the point for consideration is:whether revision is maintainable as against final order of the k w t?the applicants filed an application under section 83(2) of the act before the k w t challenging the election held to the managing committee of sahh inayayth & jamia mosque, gauribindanur on 5.1.2003 and sought for re-election before the tribunal. the application was rejected by the tribunal for the reasons recorded in the impugned order. the k w t has held that the application was not maintainable for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 07 2005 (HC)

Sri Srinivas Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Commissioner and Secret ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-07-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR2606; 2005(4)KarLJ435

ordern. kumar, j.1. the petitioner joined services of the second respondent-karnataka electricity board as junior assistant in its o & m division, hubli, in the year 1977. the qualification prescribed for the said post was pass in s.s.l.c. however, he was studying b.a. in music. in the year 1979, he passed bachelor of music final examination and he was awarded a degree in bachelor of arts/music, by the karnataka university, dharwad, as per annexure-a.2. the second respondent-board has formulated a scheme in the year 1975 under which employees who acquire additional qualifications while in service are entitled to draw four additional increments, a copy of which is produced as annexure-b. in terms of the aforesaid order, the petitioner made an application to the second respondent for grant of additional increments as per the scheme available as per annexure-d. the second respondent recommended the case of the petitioner annexure-f. however, the petitioner was served with a communication as per annexure-g informing him that he is not entitled for advance increments for acquiring the degree in bachelor of music. challenging the aforesaid communication, he filed a writ petition before this court in w.p. no. 18543/1994, which came to be disposed of as withdrawn on 4th july, 1997 reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said endorsement. thereafter in spite of several requests from the petitioner when the 4th respondent did not accede to his request to grant additional .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2005 (HC)

R.N. Shetty and anr. Vs. Karnataka Industrial Investment and Developme ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-31-2005

Reported in : [2005]126CompCas145(Kar)

1. this miscellaneous first appeal preferred under section 32(9) of the state financial corporations act, 1951 (for short, 'the act'), is directed against the order dated january 3, 2004, passed in misc. p. no. 25 of 1994 on the file of the court of the sixth additional city civil judge, bangalore.2. the respondent herein had filed miscellaneous petition under section 31(1)(aa) of the act for enforcement of liability against the appellant along with two other alleged guarantors. the respondent had further sought for a direction to pay jointly and severally a sum of rs. 18,40,000 along with interest. the said miscellaneous case came to be decreed by means of an order dated november 24, 2001, by the sixth additional city civil judge, bangalore. the appellant herein filed m. f. a. no. 1146 of 2002 and m. f. a. no. 1293 of 2003 in this court calling in question the order dated november 24, 2001, passed by the court below on the ground that no notice was issued to the appellants herein and the paper publication was defective and was not in accordance with law. this court by its order dated july 13, 2002, allowed the above appeals and set aside the order dated november 24, 2001, passed in miscellaneous petition no. 25 of 1994 and directed the court below to dispose of the same within a period of eight months.3. after the remand of the proceedings, the court below by its order dated january 3, 2004, allowed the petition of the respondent-corporation with costs and directed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2005 (HC)

Uttar Pradesh State Bridge Construction Corporation Limited Vs. Bangal ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-22-2005

Reported in : 2005(3)ARBLR254(Kar); 2005(2)CTLJ451(Kar); 2005(5)KarLJ112

v. jagannathan, j.1. legality of the termination of the contract entered into by the bangalore development authority ('bda' for short) with the uttar pradesh state bridge construction corporation limited ('appellant-corporation' for short), which has been upheld by the learned single judge, is the subject-matter of these two appeals and as the issues involved are in principle identical, the two appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. the facts that are material for our purpose are as under:the bda, which is the first respondent herein, has taken up infrastructure developmental work in bangalore city and as a part of it, by its notice inviting tender dated 4-11-2002 invited tenders on turnkey basis for construction of grade separators/flyovers at various places viz.:1. the intersection of airport road and intermediate ring road junction;2. bangalore dairy circle; and3. jayadeva institute of cardiology circle.the appellant-construction corporation, a public undertaking wholly owned by the government of uttar pradesh and incorporated under the provisions of the indian companies act, 1956, was set up in the year 1973 and since then, it has been known for specialised work in the field of construction of bridges, hydraulic and other structures and over the years built up a reputation and has to its credit, construction of bridges of national importance and also several projects in other countries. the appellant's response to the tender was accepted by the bda and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 09 2005 (HC)

Sri Chandrasen Bapusaheb Jadhav and anr. Vs. Sri Gangappa Yallappa Hol ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-09-2005

Reported in : ILR2006KAR1940

huluvadi g. ramesh, j.1. this appeal is by the plaintiffs being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned principal civil judge (senior division) belgaum, in r.a. no. 40/1991 in allowing the appeal and setting the judgment and decree of the trial court in o.s. no. 877 1986.2. plaintiffs filed a suit before the i additional civil judge (junior division) belgaum in o.s. no. 87/1986 for possession of the suit property. according to the plaintiffs, suit property in sy.no. 90/1b situated at balekundri khurd village measures 4 acres 2 guntas and is assessed at rs. 9.72ps. the land is a watan land granted for officiating as patil of the village officer under the karnataka village offices abolition act, 1961 and bombay hereditary offices act, 1894. plaintiffs state that sy.no. 90/1 was divided into 90/1a and 90/1b. originally the land was held by balavantrao parashuram jadhav, bapusaheb parashuram jadhav and yeshwantrao parashuram jadhav. since the land was resumed by the government of mysore, it was re-granted to balavantro jadhav in the year 1966 by the assistant commissioner belgaum, and m.e.no. 2074 was rectified in pursuance of the regrant order. subsequent to this regrant order, partition took place and the suit land was allotted to the share of bapusaheb parashuram jadhav who died in the year 1976 and thus plaintiffs became the owners of the suit land prior to the introduction of the karnataka village offices abolition act, 1961. the suit land was alienated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 15 2005 (HC)

Pandurang Katti S/O Srinivasa Ramachandra Katti and Sulabha S. Katti W ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-15-2005

ordera.c. kabbin, j.1. the petitioner no. 1 herein the husband, and the petitioner no. 2 is the mother -in-law of the respondent no. 2 . challenging the registration of a case against them in basvanugudi women police station cr no. 66/2003 for offenses punishable under section 498-a of the ipc and section 3 and 4 of the dowry prohibition act, they have filed this petition under section 482 of the crpc with a prayer that the fir may be quashed2. on 3/10/2003 at about 1 p.m the respondent no. 2 filed a complaint in basvanugudi women police station. the complaint read as under'i trupti katti got married to mr. pandurang katti on 18th june 1999 at gwalior , m.p my father spent around rs. 4.00 lakh in marriage that includes gold worth rs 1.5 lakhs . my mother -in-law was not satisfied because her demands were not fulfilled.from the first day of the marriage my mother in law mrs. sulabha katti was harassing me . but even then both husband and wife lived peacefully because my mother-in-law used to stay in jaisinghpuri am software engineer working with component insigths, crescent towers, crescent road bangalore. my husband is also a software engineer, working with it solutions, bull temple road, bangalore . his contact numbers are: 6678322 (o) and 9845062209 (m)i delivered a male child at my parent's place bhopal on 04-02-2003. at the time of delivery the ultrasound report showed that the child has abnormality called 'duodenum atresia' and heart problems. he underwent two major .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 2005 (HC)

G.K. Mallikarjunappa Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-18-2005

Reported in : 2005(2)KarLJ205

orderd.v. shylendra kumar, j.1. this writ petition before this court by the purchaser of a granted land is the second round of litigation. the subject-matter land, a extent of 3 acres 31 guntas in sy. no. 51 of ganadakatte village, channagiri taluk in davangere district, is a piece of agricultural land which had been granted in favour of one kariyappa-father of the third respondent -a person belonging to adi karnataka community [scheduled caste] in terms of grant/saguvall chit dated 6-2-1957. it is this land that the grantee had sold in favour of one kariyappa -father of the writ petitioner. the question is as to whether the said sale transaction is hit by the provisions of the karnataka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) act, 1978 (for short, 'the act').2. the son of the grantee bhimappa third respondent herein - had filed an application before the assistant commissioner, praying for invalidation of the sale and for restoration of the land in his favour on the premise that the sale was in violation of the terms of the grant.3. the application was registered and notice was issued to the petitioner, who was in possession of the land. the proceedings culminated in allowing the application in terms of the order dated 29-4-1992 and the sale was held void, as it was in violation of the condition of the grant that the land should not be alienated for a period of fifteen years and therefore directed resumption of the land in favour of .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //