Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: recent Court: karnataka Year: 2000 Page 1 of about 80 results (0.007 seconds)

Apr 11 2000 (HC)

Bharat B. Kurbetti and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Another

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-11-2000

Reported in : 2000CriLJ4216; 2000(5)KarLJ125

..... as a result of which it would be a tough election for the accused they induced and persuaded the complainant not to contest the election with the mediation of certain persons; (d) that the mediators represented to the accused that if the complainant does not contest the election, accused 1 to 11 would deposit a sum of rs. 40,000/- in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 07 2000 (HC)

Zulekha Begum Alias Rahmathunnisa Begum Vs. Abdul Raheem

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-07-2000

Reported in : II(2000)DMC99; ILR2000KAR743; 2000(2)KarLJ70

..... the petitioner is not a valid divorce under muslim law. he submitted that muslim law requires that there should be an attempt of reconciliation between husband and wife by two mediators one chosen by the wife from her family and other chosen from his side. if there is no evidence to show that any attempt for settlement prior to divorce was ..... bench of the gauhati high court and take the view that the divorce must be preceded among muslims by an attempt of reconciliation between the husband and wife by two mediators, one chosen by the wife from her family and the other by the husband from his side. in the above view of the matter, a mohammedan husband cannot divorce his ..... to show that there was an attempt for a settlement prior to the divorce and when there was no such attempt prior to divorce to arrive at a settlement by mediators, then there cannot be a valid divorce under mohammedan law.29. in the present case it is admitted by both the counsels for the petitioner and the respondent that there .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 2000 (HC)

T. Siddeshi Vs. the Deputy Commissioner, Davanagere and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-05-2000

Reported in : AIR2001Kant297; ILR2001KAR488

orderthe court 1. the petition filed seeking writ of certiorari for quashing the order of the deputy commissioner dated 11-9-2000 at annexure-k the order of the assistant commissioner dated 20-10-1997 at annexure-g and order of the tahsildar dated 6-6-1995 at annexure-f.2. the dispute pertains to the entry of katha in respect of survey no. 97/ia-5 of davanagere village, measuring 1 acre 05 guntas. the land earlier part of survey no. 97 belonged to the father of the petitioner, who in the year 1970 is said to have sold the land by a registered sale deed in favour of the partnership firm of adinarayana setty and sons. the 4th respondent is son of adinarayana setty one of the partners of the firm. subsequent to the sale, the name of adinarayana setty and sons came to be entered into katha registers.3. it is the contention of the petitioner that, despite the sale, the possession of the land continued with them and that in the year 1983 when the first photo took place, the name of the father of the petitioner was entered in respect of the land in question. subsequent to the demise of the father of the petitioner, the petitioner entered into a partition with his brother under a registered partition deed and sought for change of katha in his favour in respect of the aforesaid land, which came to be granted, and the name of the petitioner continued in the katha registers till 1994-95. the 4th respondent in the year 1994 on the basis of partition that has taken place in his family .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 2000 (HC)

Shivalingappa Vs. Management of Minerva Mills and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Nov-21-2000

Reported in : [2001(90)FLR382]; (2001)IILLJ451Kant

orderm.f. saldanha, j. 1. i have heard the petitioner's learned advocate at considerable length because the point agitated by him in this case essentially centres around the question as to whether an employee who desires to agitate the question relating to quantum of gratuity paid to him at the termination of his services is free to agitate the issue after an abnormally long period of time. the petitioner in this case claims to have joined the services of the erstwhile minerva mills on january 1, 1946. these mills are supposed to have run into difficulties and were closed from april 4, 1966 to february 10, 1967 and then again from january 2, 1970 to october 18, 1971. the ntc thereafter took over this mill along with several other sick units from about the year 1972 and the petitioner claims to have been among those of the workers who were recalled when the unit was reopened and admittedly he retired from service on january 1, 1984. along with his dues, the respondents paid him a sum of rs. 5,995.88 being the gratuity for 12 years. therefore on january 24, 1997, the petitioner approached the controlling authority with an application for condonation of delay in which he contended that due to poverty and illness he had not been able to agitate the claim earlier and the short contention was that the petitioners total length of service viz. the period of service put in by him with the erstwhile minerva mills had not been taken into consideration when computing the gratuity, that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 15 2000 (HC)

Smt. Dr. Banu V.T. and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Nov-15-2000

Reported in : ILR2001KAR2263; 2001(1)KarLJ492

order1. though these petitions are posted for preliminary hearing in 'b' group, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, these petitions are taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this order.2. the petitioners in these petitions are presently working as lady medical officers in the 5th respondent-karnataka power corporation limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'corporation')- in these petitions, they have prayed for striking down rule 2(h) of the karnataka conduct of entrance test for admission to postgraduate degree and diploma (medical and dental) courses rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the 'rules'), as unconstitutional; or in the alternative to strike down the words 'medical' and 'under the karnataka societies registration act, 1961' in the said rule, as unconstitutional.3. sri rajeshwara, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners strongly submitted that the petitioners are working in the 5th respondent-corporation, which is also a government of karnataka undertaking and they are similarly situated like the doctors serving in autonomous medical institutions established under the karnataka societies registration act, 1961; and that being the position, there is absolutely no justification to restrict the admission to the postgraduate course only to the in-service candidates who are working in autonomous medical institutions established by the government of karnataka under the societies registration act. it is his submission .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2000 (HC)

A. Narasimhamurthy Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Sep-26-2000

Reported in : ILR2000KAR4761; 2001(2)KarLJ313

orderb.n. mallikarjuna, j.1. petitioner is common in these two petitions and he has sought for quashing the common order of respondent 4-deputy commissioner dated 18-4-2000, annexure-c is the order. therefore, this common order would dispose of both the petitions. 2. when the matter came up for hearing for admission on 2-8-2000, emergent notice regarding rule was ordered for respondent 3. learned high court government pleader took notice and appeared for respondents 1, 2 and 4, respondent 3 is served but he had remained absent. the matter is therefore taken up for final disposal. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned high court government pleader, perused the papers. 3. briefly stated the facts are: certain land ad-measuring 4 acres in sy. no. 60 of byradenahalli village, kundana hobli, devanahalli taluk, bangalore rural district undisputably was granted under darkast in favour of respondent 3-gun-dappa on 29-7-1966 and it would appear that thereafter khata was changed in his name and accordingly an entry was made in the mutation register on 23-8-1966. subsequently, on 28-9-1966 gundappa sold the said land in favour of the petitioner-narasimhamurthy. 4. the act called the karnataka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') came into force with effect from 1-1-1979. section 4 of the act declares that transfer of granted lands made either before or after the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 2000 (HC)

Modinsaheb Peersaheb Peerzade and Others Vs. Smt. Meerabi and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Sep-05-2000

Reported in : ILR2000KAR3716; 2000(6)KarLJ616

k. sreedhar rao, j.1. this appeal is filed against the judgment and decree passed in o.s. no. 100 of 1989 on the file of the learned civil judge, jamakhandi.2. defendants 1 to 5 and 8 to 10 in the suit are the appellants. the plaintiff and defendants 6 and 7 are respondents in the appeal. appellants 1 to 3 are the brothers of the first and fourth respondents. the 5th appellant is the aunt of the first respondent and appellants 1 to 3. respondents 2 and 3 are the alienees of the 5th appellant. appellants 6 to 8 are the alienees of the second appellant.3. one kasimsaheb and peersaheb are the full brothers. kasimsaheb died on 13-11-1968 leaving behind his widow-the 5th appellant. peersaheb died on 25-9-1987 leaving behind appellants 1 to 4 and the first respondent who are his children. 'a' schedule properties are agricultural lands situated at kokatanur village in athani taluk, 'b' schedule properties are agricultural lands situated at tungal village in jamkhandi taluk, 'c' schedule properties are the house properties situated at tungal village in jamkhandi taluk and 'd' schedule properties are the movable like tractor, pumpset, gold and silver ornaments and agriculture implements. the plaintiff in the suit submits that the suit schedule properties belong to her father and after his demise, she is entitled to l/3rd share in all the properties.4. the first defendant has filed his written statement contending that the lands bearing sy. nos. 1264, 1265 and 1266 of kokatanur village .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 11 2000 (HC)

N.P. Ponnappa Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-11-2000

Reported in : AIR2000Kant384; ILR2000KAR5046; 2000(6)KarLJ84

order1. since common questions of fact and law are involved in all these writ petitions, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed off by this common order.2. petitioner in writ petition no. 26284 of 1994 claims that he is the absolute owner and in possession of lands bearing sy. nos. 244, 256 and 257 of garagndoor village of somawarpet taluk, kodagu district. petitioner claims that the lands are redeemed lands and he has got absolute right over the lands as well as trees standing therein. he has produced a copy of the jamabandhi extract of sy. nos. 244, 256 and 257 for the years 1929-30, 1944 and 1993 and they are annexed as petition documents 'a, b and c' respectively. petitioner with an intention to have better coffee cultivation in the lands in question, had approached the deputy conservator of forests, madikeri division, madikeri (hereinafter referred to as 'forest officer'), for grant of permission to cut and remove the overgrown trees. pursuant to the request so made, it appears that the forest officer had accorded permission to the petitioner to cut and remove the overgrown shade trees in the lands in question. it appears, petitioner had cut more number of trees than what was permitted by the forest officer. in view of this illegal felling of trees by the petitioner, the range forest officer of the area had booked a forest offence case in foc no. 47/92-93, dated 23-2-1993 and seized the timber prepared out of illegally felled trees. since the petitioner offered to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 2000 (HC)

Smt. Kumbalagunte Gowramma (Deceased) by L.Rs. and Others Vs. Kumbalag ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-10-2000

Reported in : ILR2000KAR3695; 2001(2)KarLJ456

k.r. prasad rao, j.1. this appeal is filed by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree passed by the court of principal district judge, bellary in r.a. no. 67 of 1989, dated 19th december, 1994 allowing the said appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the civil judge, hospet, in o.s. no. 148 of 1980, dated 27-2-1987, granting a decree for partition in favour of the plaintiff. 2. the appellant-plaintiff filed the suit in the trial court seeking for the relief of partition and for separate possession of her half share in the plaint schedule properties alleging that she is the daughter of one kumbalagunte dodda veeranna by his second wife, smt. sanna veeramma. the 2nd defendant-halamma is her stepsister, being the daughter of the first wife smt. dodda veeramma of her father, kumbalagunte dodda veeranna. the 1st defendant is dodda veeramma, who is the first wifeof her father. she further alleged that the plaint 'b' and 'c' schedule properties are the ancestral properties belonging to herself and the defendants 1 and 2 and that she is entitled to 1/3rd share in the said properties as legal heir of her father. 3. the defendants filed their written statement contending that under a registered gift deed dated 1-5-1956, the plaint schedule items 1 to 4 and 8 and 12 have been gifted in favour of the 2nd defendant-halamma by her father, kumbalagunte dodda veeranna, who was the sole surviving coparcener and by virtue of the said gift deed, executed in her favour, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 2000 (HC)

Babu Yallappa Sanadi Vs. Land Tribunal, Belgaum and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jul-07-2000

Reported in : ILR2000KAR2872; 2000(6)KarLJ44

orderk.r. prasad rao, j. 1. this revision petition is filed against the orders passed by the district land reforms appellate authority, belgaum, in appeal no. ralr 246 of 1986, dated 29-3-1990 confirming with modification the order of the land tribunal, belgaum in case no. klr bastwad sr 119+120+122+123+127+128+95+8+10 relating to the land in dispute in sy. no. 27 of bastwad village.2. the revision petitioner filed form 7 before the land tribunal claiming occupancy rights in respect of 1 acre 27 guntas of land in sy. no. 27 of bastwad village. the original owner contested the said proceedings. the land tribunal after holding an enquiry, came to the conclusion that, though the land was a tenanted land, the revision petitioner was not in possession of the said land by the notified date, since his father surrendered the tenancy rights in favour of the original owner and ordered for vesting the land in state. the correctness of the said order has been questioned both by revision petitioner and also by the 3rd respondent by filing writ petitions before this court. the present revision petitioner filed w.p. no. 1498 of 1992 which was subsequently transferred to the land reforms appellate authority after the said authority was constituted on amendment of the karnataka land reforms act and it was numbered as ralr 234 of 1986. respondent 3 filed w.p. no. 8649 of 1982, it was also transferred to the land reforms appellate authority and it was numbered as appeal no. ralr 246 of 1986. .....

Tag this Judgment!

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