Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: karnataka Year: 2005 Page 4 of about 95 results (0.007 seconds)

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!

Dec 22 2005 (HC)

Dilip Kumar Alias Srinivas and anr. Vs. Damodar Narayanrao Rammangudka ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-22-2005

v.g. sabhabhit, j.1. this appeal by defendants 1 to 7 is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the court of the dist. judge, gulbarga in r.a. no. 17/01 dated 30-6-2003 dismissing the appeal and cross-objections preferred by the defendant no. 2 and confirming the judgment and decree passed by the court of the addl. civil judge (sr. dn.), gulbarga, in o.s. no. 203/ 1995 dated 10-8-2001 wherein the suit of the plaintiff is partly decreed by holding that the plaintiff is entitled to partition and separate possession of 1/12th share in the suit schedule house bearing 1-3-185 situated at chincholi and in suit lands measuring 21 acres 11 guntas both situated at doulatpur village in chincholi taluk and dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for partition and separate possession in respect of the suit land in sy. no. 125 measuring 4 acres 27 guntas and for the relief of future mesne profits of the suit properties and further ordering that defendants 2 to 5 are also entitled to partition and separate possession of their 1/12th share each in the house property and the suit lands in sy. nos. 18 and 19 of doulatpur village.2. the essential facts of the case leading up to the filing of this appeal with reference to the rank of the parties before the trial court are as follows:the plaintiff filed o.s. 203/95 on the file of the addl. civil judge (sr. dn.), gulbarga, seeking for partition and separate possession of his 1/9th share in the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 2005 (HC)

Mahantesh Vs. the State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-31-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR4061; 2006(2)KarLJ598

s.r. bannurmath, j.1. being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 4.4.2002 passed by the learned sessions judge, belgaum, in sessions case no. 97/2000 finding the accused guilty of the offences punishable under section 302 ipc and sentencing him to imprisonment for life, the present appeal is filed.2. the brief facts giving rise to the present case as per the prosecution are as follows:-the deceased bharathi daughter of pw-1 thangawwa originally resident of hulikavi village was married to accused about seven years prior to her death on 18.11.1999. according to the prosecution after the marriage, the accused who hails from muthwad village in saundatti taluk came to eke his livelihood and settled in the janatha plot houses at hirebagewadi. according to the prosecution, in spite of seven years of marriage the deceased did not get any children and angered by the same, the accused used to assault her, treating cruelly especially while in drunken condition. it is alleged that in spite of advice from the mother and others, the accused did not mend his ways. the ultimate result of this was brutal murder of bharathi in the afternoon of 18.11.1999 in her house itself.as per the prosecution, pw-3 kasturi and her husband pw-9 suresh were the neighbours of the accused and the deceased and his mother p w-10 along with another pw-4 roshan. it is alleged in the afternoon about 1 p.m. the neighbours heard the quarrelling and shouting as well as cry of woman from the house of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 2005 (HC)

Bhaskar Rao and ors. Vs. L. Kamalamma and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-06-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR2129; 2005(4)KarLJ66

orderhuluvadi g. ramesh, j.1. these petitions are filed under section. 482, cr.p.c. being aggrieved by the order of issue of process by the iii addl. city cmm, bangalore in cc 6843/2001 by order dated 7.7.2001 for the offence under section 306, ipc.2. one r.k. shivakumar had filed a complaint against the petitioners herein and one more person alleging offence under section 306, ipc that r.k. girish kumar, brother of the complainant was working at bangalore dairy and that he was subjected to mental cruelty and harassment. being unable to tolerate, on 12.6.1992, the said girish kumar committed suicide by setting fire to himself. later he was shifted to victoria hospital on the same day. while on the way to the hospital, he is said to have informed the complainant that the accused persons, who are employees of bangalore dairy, were harassing him and ill-treating him and as such, he himself set fire and committed suicide. the said girish kumar was a trade union member and was playing an active role in the activities of the milk dairy union. stating that the accused persons were harassing and ill-treating girish kumar, his brother - complainant filed a complaint. the vijayanagar police, after investigation, filed b report and the same has been challenged by the complainant before the court below and after taking cognizance of the offence and recording sworn statement of the complainant and other witnesses who are members of the trade union, the court below stating that there is a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 2005 (HC)

All India Trade Union Congress and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka and ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-13-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR3052; 2005(5)KarLJ414; (2006)ILLJ344Kant

orderr. gururajan, j.1. petitioners in all these petitions are before me challenging the notification bearing no. ld:15:lwa:2001 dtd: 1-8-2001 (annexure-o).2. facts in wp no. 28677-78/2001;the first and second petitioners are trade unions. third and the fourth petitioners are employed in the canteen run and maintained by the respondent/management. petitioners say that the management of the industries preferred employment on contract basis and that would facilitate them to exploit the workmen in terms of cheap labour. the system of contract labour has been considered as a baneful and pernicious system and has kindled the judicial conscience since the workmen would have no security of service and their wages have often been far below the minimum wages prescribed by the state government. in order to arrest this trend the central government enacted the contract labour (regulation and abolition) act, 1970 (for short 'the act'). the primary object of the act is to abolish the system of contract labour wherever it is possible. second respondent issued a notification dtd 11-4-1997 prohibiting employment of contract labour in industrial canteen. the said notification was challenged by several managements before this court by way of writ petitions. the matter was referred to a division bench. a division bench of this court dismissed the writ petitions in terms of its order dtd 30-9-1998 (reported in ilr 1998 kar 1897). the management thereafter preferred special leave petitions. they .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 2005 (HC)

G. Jayaram Reddy Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-13-2005

Reported in : ILR2005KAR1963; 2005(5)KarLJ1

s.r. nayak, j.1. a short question that arises for our consideration and decision in this appeal is whether acquisition of 1 acre 3 guntas of land comprised in sy.no. 122 of kodihalli, varthur hobli, bangalore south taluk (hereinafter shortly referred to as the 'schedule land) belonging to the appellant herein for a public purpose, to wit, for golf-cum-hotel resort near airport should be sustained notwithstanding the fact that the acquisition of 38 acres 21 guntas of land acquired under the same notification has been condemned by a division bench of this court as fraud on power and tainted by malafide. the acquiring authority and the beneficiary of the acquisition would contend that the acquisition of the schedule land should be sustained notwithstanding the quashing of the notifications by the division bench of this court with regard to 38 acres 21 guntas of land, on the ground of delay and laches on the part of the appellant in approaching this court. on the other hand, it is the contention of the appellant that he has shown sufficient cause for the delay in approaching this court for the relief alternatively, it was contended by the appellant that even assuming that the delay is not satisfactorily explained by the appellant, that circumstance should not come in the way of this court quashing the land acquisition proceedings with regard to the schedule land, because, this court has already quashed the acquisition of larger extent of land measuring 38 acres 21 guntas acquired .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 2005 (HC)

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Mc Dowell and Co. Ltd., Rep. by Its ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-13-2005

Reported in : 2005(101)ECC609; 2005(186)ELT145(Kar); ILR2005KAR2613

orderd.v. shylendra kumar, j.1. the orders of the tribunal which is functioning under section 35-b of the central excise act, 1944 (for short 'the act') and passing orders in exercise of powers under the proviso to section 35-f of the act have always been the subject matter of controversy and subject for further litigation to approach the high court by invoking the provisions of articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india and on an occasion or two, even the supreme court.2. while more often than not, it is the assessee who is normally aggrieved by the orders passed by the tribunal either granting partial waiver of the amount required to be deposited for maintaining the appeal before the tribunal or in some cases not-granting any waiver, this time the revenue is before this court questioning the legality of one such order passed by the tribunal where under the tribunal has granted full waiver of the requirement of the deposit of the amount, amount that is the subject matter or dispute in the appeals pending before it, in terms of the order dated 13.12.2004. the impugned order is one passed in common in several appeals, pending before the tribunal, namely, excise appeal nos. 590-591/2004 and excise appeal no. 1051/2004.3. the value of the subject matter in appeal nos. 590-91/2004 is said to be of a sum of rs 35 crores and the value of the subject matter in appeal no. 1051/2004 is said to be rs 29 crores. it is mainly disputing this liability which the respondent was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 15 2005 (HC)

H. Shivappa and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-15-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)KarLJ328

orderd.v. shylendra kumar, j.1. in all these petitions, wherein mainly persons elected as councilors to various city municipal councils in the state figure as petitioners, the question that is involved is as to whether the government notification no. udd 51 mlr 2004 (p-1), dated 1-9-2004 issued by the first respondent-state for the purposes of section 42(2-a) of the karnataka municipalities act, 1964 (for short, 'the act') providing for reservation of the posts of 'president' and 'vice-president' in various city municipal councils; is in conformity with the very provisions, namely, section 42(2-a) of the act and if not as to whether any intervention is called for.2. while it is the assertion of some of the petitioners that the reservations as provided in terms of notification dated 1-9-2004 bristles with various anomalies, discrepancies, virtually flouting the very provisions; that while in respect of some of the councils, the reservation had been provided in excess, in the sense that, the reservation has been provided repetitively. complaint of some of the other petitioners not falling in this category is that there is a lacking in providing such reservation; that by not providing reservation in favour of a category statutorily provided for, reservation is being deprived in violation of the enabling provision; that permitting the state government to go ahead with the conduct of the election to the post of 'president' and 'vice-president' in such municipal councils will only .....

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!

Apr 15 2005 (HC)

The Registrar General Vs. Sri Gundu Rao and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-15-2005

Reported in : 2005CriLJ3463; ILR2005KAR1990; 2005(4)KarLJ593

orderashok b. hinchigeri, j.1. this contempt proceedings are initiated by this court on its own motion. the petition is presented under article 215 of the constitution of india read with section 15(1) of the contempt of courts act, 1971. the subject matter of the complaint is that the accused have fabricated an interim order alleged to have been issued by this court in w.a.no. 6282/2002 and produced the same in the proceedings before the land tribunal, belthangadi.2. the brief facts of the case are that the accused no. 1 had a small piece of agricultural land for which a person claiming himself to be a tenant sought for occupancy rights. the accused filed w.p.no. 40893/2002 (lr) challenging the order dated 15-7-97 passed by the land tribunal, belthangadi. this writ petition was dismissed by the learned single judge on 13-11-2002. that order was challenged in w.a.no. 6282/2002. the appeal papers were returned on 22-1-2003 to the advocate for the appellant (the accused no. 1 herein) for complying with the office objections. the papers were re-filed on 17-2-2003.3. meanwhile, the accused no. 1 produced a fabricated interim order dated 5-12-2002 purported to have been passed by the division bench of this court in w.a.no. 6282/2002. this production of the order was on 4-1-2003 in the office of the tahsildar-cum-secretary of the land tribunal, belthangadi. as the tahsildar did not find the seal of this court on the fabricated interim order and some of the writings were by hand, the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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