Karnataka Court March 1953 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sampu Gowda Hanume Gowda and ors. Vs. State of Mysore and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-30-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Kant156; AIR1953Mys156; ILR1953KAR440; (1954)32MysLJ12
Venkataramaiya, J.1. These are three petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of writs in the nature of Mandamus, certiorari or appropriate directions to the Government of Mysore on grounds which are substantially the same. These were heard together and may be conveniently disposed of by one order as the principal question raised in it whether Government can review orders regarding grant of agricultural lands. The facts which may be taken as undisputed are that the Petitioner in C. P. 155 of 51-52 was granted 3 acres in S. NO. 24 in Narsipur village, Arsikara Taluk, Hassan District on payment of Rs. 75/-, the appeal preferred by some persons to the Revenue Commissioner objecting to the grant was dismissed on 27-11-1944, that Government also dismissed on 22-2-1946 the appeal filed against the order of the Revenue Commissioner, that the application filed subsequently for review of the order was rejected by Government on 21-12-1949 but on a second petition ...
B.V. Venkatacharya Vs. the Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-30-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Kant175; AIR1954Mys175
Venkata Ramaiya, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal against the dismissal of a suit for damages claimed on the ground of wrongful termination of service. The plaintiff who is a graduate in Agriculture was appointed Farm Superintendent on a salary of Rs. 300/- in the grade Rs. 300-25-500 on prohibition for 1 year, entered on his duties as such on 10-8-1946 and was served on 23-11-1946 with a notice intimating termination of his employment from 9-12-1346. He issued a notice on 23-1-1947 alleging that the termination of service was wrongful but the defendant in its reply of 21-3-1947 maintained that it was justified. Thereupon the suit was filed on 5-4-1947 seeking payment of Rs. 2487-1-6 as salary for unexpired period of appointment, Rs. 331-10-0 high price allowance, compensation of 1000-0-0 for mental worry, of 2000-0-0 for loss of reputation, of 500-0-0 for loss due to dislocation of affairs and 25-5-6 as notices charges, in all Rs. 6344-1-0.Defendant denied liability to pay any amount...
Union of India and anr. Vs. M. Hanuman Das
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-25-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Kant180; AIR1954Mys180
Vasudevamurthy, J.1. This is an appeal by the Union of India and the Agent and General Manager of M. & S. M. Railway, Madras, against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Bangalore, granting a decree against them in respect of two bundles of goods which had been entrusted to the railway authorities at Bombay (Victoria Terminus) for transport by rail to Yeshwanthpur near Bangalore City in May 1948.2. The main and practically the only defence of the defendant-railway was that the plaintiff had failed to make a declaration as regards the contents of the two bundles in dispute as required by Section 75, Indian Railways Act, 1890 (which corresponds to Section 59, Mysore Railways Act) and that as those bundles contained goods worth more than Rs. 300/-, the plaintiff could not recover their value. That defence has been rejected by the Subordinate Judge.3. Section 75 of the Indian Railways Act provides that-'....the railway administration shall not be responsible for the loss, des...
State of Mysore Vs. Gujjadi Narayan Nayak and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-22-1953
Reported in: AIR1964Kant190; AIR1964Mys190
N. Sreenivasa Rau, C. J. 1. This reference relates to the levy of sales tax under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957. The relevant facts and the question of law giving rise to this reference will be clear from the order of reference which is given below in full:'The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Mysore Division, Mysore, has filed these revision petition under Section 23 (1) of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').The principal question that arises for decision in these cases is, what is the meaning of the expression 'Sale by the first or the earliest of successive dealers in the State who is liable to tax under this section' found in Section 5 (3) of the 'Act'.The material facts in these cases are as follows : The respondents in these petitions are 'dealers' In coffee seeds. They have their place of business at Manga-lore. Admittedly they purchased coffee seeds with which we are concerned in these petitions from other 'dealers'. In the State befo...
B.K. Linganna and ors. Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-13-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Kant12; AIR1954Mys12
ORDERVasudevamurthy, J.1. The petitioners 13 in number who were accused in the Court of the Second City Magistrate, Mysore, and who are all described as students, have been tried and convicted for an offence under Section 56(o), Mysore Police Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10/- each and in default to undergo S. I. for six days. The charge against them was that on 26-9-1952 at about 10-30 A.M. they were present at a meeting held to inaugurate the work of the Committee on Educational Reforms in Mysore in the Crawford Hall, Mysore City, and that there they behaved riotously and in a disorderly manner by shouting some slogans and throwing pamphlets and thereby caused a breach of the peace. The charge also mentioned that the accused's conduct amounted to offences by Clauses (o), (q) and (r) of Section 56. Though the learned Magistrate has not chosen to make any reference to the offences under Clauses (q) and (r) of Section 56 and does not say in his judgment whether he acquitted the...
Puttappa Vs. Maligamma and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Kant147; AIR1954Mys147; ILR1954KAR113
ORDER1. This is a revision petition against the decision in Misc. Appeal No. 7/51-52 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Hassan, setting aside the order of review in Mis. 142 of 49-50 on the file of the Munsiff, Hassan, granting review of the decree in O. S. No. 351 of 48-49. 2. The property in dispute was purchased by Puttappa, the present petitioner, from one Mahadeviah and his son Renukaradhya. Bramarambha, their minor daughter, filed a suit claiming the property as belonging to her deceased mother and after her death Malligamma respondent 1 in this case was brought on record, as the L. R. of Bramarambha. The ultimate decision of the High Court in that case is that Malligamma was entitled to 1/4th share of the property while Puttappa the present petitioner was entitled to 3/4th share. When Malligamma was executing the decree in her favour, the three younger brothers of Puttappa, the petitioner in this case, filed a suit for declaration of their title to the property in dispute and...
A.V. Krishnappa Reddy Vs. Venkatappareddy and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-05-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Kant148; AIR1954Mys148
ORDER1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the District Judge, Bangalore, rejecting I. A. No. 3 filed by the plaintiff in O. S. NO. 81 of 1951-52.2. The said original suit was filed by the plaintiff for partition and possession of his l/4th share in the family properties, alleging that he was in joint possession, on payment of a fixed court-fee of RS. 50/-. Later, an amendment of the plaint to include a prayer for cancellation of a release deed was sought for and granted by the Court. In consequence of the amendment granted, the plaintiff was required to pay an additional court-fee of Rs. 975/-. Pleading his inability to meet the heavy demand, he filed an application (I A. No. 3) under Order 33, Rule 1, Civil P. C., through his counsel for permission to continue the suit as a pauper. The trial Court held that such an application in pending proceedings is not maintainable.3. Mr. Rama Rao, the learned Advocate for the respondent, frankly admitted that he is unable to...
Papiahachary Vs. Gurusamappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-05-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Kant149; AIR1954Mys149; (1955)33MysLJ58
ORDER1. The short point for consideration in this revision petition is whether Execution Application No. 889 of 48-49 on the file of the Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, filed on 23-12-1948 is in time or whether it is barred by time. The decree which is sought to be executed was passed on 10-6-1940. In Execution Case No. 976 of 41-42 certain movables and immoveables were attached but the execution application was dismissed as being old and the attachment was ordered to subsist. In Execution No. 84 of 43-44 the movables attached in the previous execution case were sought to be sold. But a third person one Venkatachalam, who is not the judgment-debtor, filed a suit in O. S. No. 224 of 43-44 claiming that the movables attached are his and got an order to stay sale of the movables sought to be sold in that execution case. The result was that the execution application was dismissed as there was no prayer in that execution application for proceeding against the judgment-debtor in respect of...
Y. Venkatakrishna Jois Vs. T. Venkataswamy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Kant124; AIR1953Mys124
ORDER1. This revision petition is against the order dated 28-8-1952 passed by the District Judge, Shimoga (Camp: Chickmagalur) in H. R. C. Appeal No. 2 of 1952-53 confirming the order dated 29-4-1952 of the Deputy Commissioner and Rent Controller, Shimoga in H. R. C. No. 120 of 1951-52.2. The house was let out to the respondent by the petitioner on 30-1-1952 and the rent agreed to was Rs. 45/- a month. The Courts below are of opinion that the cost of the building is Rs. 8000/- and have fixed the fair rent at Rs. 37-8-0 per month. It is stated that the built area of the house is about 1000 sq. ft. Both the learned District Judge and thelearned Rent Controller have assessed the value of the house at the rate of Rs. 8/- per sq. ft. according to which the value of the built area is assessed at Rs. 8000/-. The building has got a cement concrete roofing. In cases of this kind it is more usual to value the building on plinth area at the rate of Rs. 10/- a sq. ft. Even otherwise the Courts bel...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›