Karnataka Court September 1955 Judgments

Firebricks and Potteries Ltd. Vs. Firebricks and Potteries Ltd., Worke ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (1956)ILLJ571Kant

Venkataramayya, C.J. 1. This is an application under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India for cancelling a reference made by the state Government of certain disputes between the petitioner and the respondent to the industrial tribunal. The concern in which the dispute has arises being a 'controlled industry,' it is alleged that only the Central Government and not the State Government is competent to make the reference. A list of controlled industries is given in the schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, and item 37 therein is said to apply to the business of which the petitioners are managers and respondents are employees. 2. The reference purports to be under Ss. 10 and 12(5), Industrial Disputes Act, and the authority to make the reference is given in these to the appropriate Government. 'Appropriate Government' is defined in S. 2(a) thus : (a) 'Appropriate Government' means - (i) in relation to any industrial dispute concerning any industry carried on ...

Bangalore City Municipality Vs. Managing Agents, N. Sirur and Co. Ltd. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1955Kant147; AIR1955Mys147

Venkataramaiya, C.J. 1. These three appeals arise from three suits filed by the Bangalore City Municipality and disposed of by one judgment as point involved for decision is common. The respondents-defendants are mills manufacturing textiles within the limits of the Municipality by the use of machinery driven by electric power. According to the Municipality license had to be obtained by the Mills for carrying on the business with the aid of electric power and fee had to be paid in proportion to the extent of the power utilised for the purpose. It is admitted that the license was not obtained by any of the defendants in the three suits and no fee was paid to the Municipality by them. The defendants were prosecuted in the criminal Court for failure of these but were acquitted. Thereupon the three suits were filed for recovery of the amounts separately due from each of the defendants. The liability for obtaining license and for payment of the fee were denied by the defendants and upholdin...

Mysore Spinning and Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Mysore and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1955Kant148; AIR1955Mys148; [1956]7STC148(Kar)

ORDER1. Civil Petition No. 111/54 and W. P. No. 39/54 are two connected cases in which the same point of law is involved and will, therefore, be covered by a single order. The petitioner in the former is the Minerva Mills Ltd. Bangalore, and in the latter, the Mysore Spinning and . 2. Civil Petition No. 111/54 relates to a sum of Rs. 130-15-5 collected by the petitioner-company as contingency deposit for sale of cotton dust and refuse for the quarter ending December 1951. It was contended by the petitioner that the cotton dust and refuse were exempt from taxation under Section 5, Mysore Sales Tax Act. The sales Tax authorities, disagreeing with that contention, insisted: on collection of tax on these items also. As the point was not free from doubt, the petitioner Mills, by way of abundant caution, collected tax on these items from their constituents and paid the same to the Sales Tax Department. Later the sales Tax Department held that the goods referred to above were exempt from tax ...

Minerva Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Mysore and anr.

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. Civil Petition No. 111 of 1954 and Writ Petition No. 39 of 1954 are two connected cases in which the same point of law is involved and will, therefore, be covered by a single order. The petitioner in the former is the Minerva Mills Ltd., Bangalore, and in the latter, the Mysore Spinning and .2. Civil Petition No. 111 of 1954 relates to a sum of Rs. 130-15-5 collected by the petitioner-company as contingency deposit for sale of cotton dust and refuse for the quarter ending December, 1951. It was contended by the petitioner that the cotton dust and refuse were exempt from taxation under Section 5 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act. The Sales Tax Authorities, disagreeing with that contention, insisted on collection of tax on these items also. As the point was not free from doubt, the petitioner mills, by way of abundant caution, collected tax on these items from their constituents and paid the same to the Sales Tax Department. Later the Sales Tax Department held that the goods referred t...

Kagathi Venkatarayappa Vs. K.V. Venkatashamiah Setty and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1955Kant146; AIR1955Mys146

1. This is an appeal under the Guardians and Wards Act filed under circumstances which are somewhat peculiar. The parents of the minors are both alive. The brother of the minors applied for being appointed guardian of their person and property on the ground that the father is not of sound mind. The tower Court granted the application and the person appointed guardian of the father by Court has filed the appeal.2. Admittedly the father and his sons constitute a joint Hindu family, the properties, belonging to which are not disclosed in the schedule to the petition filed in the lower Court. Only the cash deposits some of which happen to be in names of the minors are specified. It is not clear whether these are the only properties admitted by the applicant to be of the minors and as to how these proceedings can be resorted to if the amounts are the property of the joint family.Under the Act a guardian can be appointed with respect to properties of minors, capable of being managed. When th...

Pattada Uthayya Vs. Pattada Somayya and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1955Kant149; AIR1955Mys149

ORDER1. This is a revision petition preferred by the petitioner-defendant against the finding of the learned Munsiff of Virajpet, Coorg, on Issue No 1 in Original Suit No. 140 of 1952, holding that the matters involved in the suit could be agitated by way of a suit. 2. The facts that have given rise to this petition are briefly as follows: The plaintiffs and defendant are members of the same family known as 'Pattada' family at Betoli village in Coorg. A few years prior to the institution of the suit, the members of this family, 73 in number, started for the benefit of the family some funds known as 'Grain Fund, Death Fund, Palettimakki Fund, Education Fund and Miscellaneous Fund' and these were being managed by the members of this family. For some reason or other, the plaintiffs did not desire to continue as members of the said funds as at present constituted and managed. Thereupon they notified their said intention to the defendant and asked him to go through the accounts and cause pa...

Chikka Veerasetty Vs. Nanjundachari and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1955Kant139; AIR1955Mys139

ORDER1. This is a revision petition preferred by the petitioner-plaintiff against the order of the learned Munsiff of Dodballapur on I. A. No. II in Original Suit No. 108 of 1953, rejecting some uncertified copies of depositions as inadmissible in evidence.2. The facts that have given rise to this petition are briefly as follows :3. The suit in O.S. 108/53 referred to above is one for redemption of a mortgage effected by plaintiff's father in favour of 1st defendant's father under a registered mortgage deed of date 25-2-1886. The suit was filed if 4-4-1953, i.e. more than 60 years from the date of the mortgage deed. For purposes of limitation plaintiff relied on an admission alleged to have been made on 25-2-1897 by 1st defendant's father with respect to the suit mortgage in his deposition in C. C. 33 of 1896-97, on the file of the learned Amildar-Magistrate, Dodballapur.In support of it he produced a copy of his aforesaid deposition granted to him on 22-7-1897. The defendants look obj...

State of Coorg Vs. P.K. Assu and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1956CriLJ539

Venkataramaiya, C.J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State of Coorg against the acquittal of the Respondents who were tried in the Court of the Munsiff and First Class Magistrate, Virajpet in C. C. No. 416 of 1953, for having exported food-grains out of Coorg without a permit on 19-2-1953. There were four accused in the case of whom the 3rd and 4th accused were discharged and A-1 and A-2 who are the respondents were acquitted.2. The evidence let in by the prosecution is sufficient enough to prove that a lorry of which A-1 is the driver and A-2 the cleaner contained Go me bags of paddy and rice underneath some bags of charcoal when it was stopped and searched by the Police. According to the notification of the Chief Commissioner of Coorg, dated 28-2-1949, exports of food-grains without a permit is a punishable offence.Admittedly the respondents had no permit with them for removal of the rice and paddy found in the lorry outside the limits of Coorg and the lorry would have left the fron...