Karnataka Court September 1958 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.
ittigi Veerabhadrappa Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Mysore, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-03-1958
Reported in: [1959]10STC531(Kar)
ORDERDas Gupta, C.J. 1. The only question raised in this petition is whether or not it was competent for the Board of Revenue to transfer proceedings pending before it for restoration of review petition, which was dismissed for default, to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. 2. The matter arises in this way :- The petitioner before us was subjected to an assessment order made for the year 1953-54 by the Sales Tax Officer, Bellary. Against that order he filed an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. That appeal failed. He thereupon filed a revision petition to the Mysore Board of Revenue. That petition was filed in the year 1956. On 12th February, 1957, the said petition was dismissed. Thereafter he filed a review petition before the said Board of Revenue. The said petition for review was dismissed on 23rd August, 1957, for default. The petitioner thereupon filed a petition for restoration of his review petition. This restoration application was filed on 14th Septembe...
Alakal Senappa and ors. Vs. State of Mysore and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-02-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Kant24; AIR1960Mys24; 1960CriLJ258
ORDER(1) The petitioners are the accused in C. C. 30 of 1957 on the file of the sub Divisional Magistrate of Hospet. Petitioners 1 to 5 have been convicted of an offence under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25; all the six petitioners have also been convicted of an offence under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50. The convictions and sentences have also been confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge of Bellary on appeal by the petitioners.(2) The complainant, who is the 2nd respondent before me, was a tenant under one Raghavendrachar, who is D. W. 1 in the case. It is the complainant's case that he has been in possession for a number of years as tenant under Raghavendrachar. On 20-2-1957 Raghavendrachar executed a sale deed in favour of the 1st petitioner in respect of the land under the occupation of the complainant. On 22-2-1957, that is two days after the sale, the incid...
Rasool Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-02-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Kant136; AIR1959Mys136; 1959CriLJ622; (1958)36MysLJ936
ORDER1. The petitioner has been convicted by the Additional First Class Magistrate, Civil Station, Bangalore, of an offence under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act of 1946 read with Rule 7 of the Foreigners Order 1948 made under the provisions of Section 3 of the said Act, and has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months. The conviction and the sentence have been confirmed on appeal by the Sessions Judge, Civil Station Bangalore. Hence this revision petition. 2. Only a question of law has been argued in this revision and that is whether the conviction of the petitioner is barred under Section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by reason of his having been acquitted under Section 494 (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a prior case, C. C. No. 805 of 1955 on the file of the First Class Magistrate, Civil Station, Bangalore. 3. There is no dispute regarding the material facts, which may be stated briefly. 4. The petitioner is a Pakistani national. He ar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›