Skip to content

Karnataka Court December 1962 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.

Dec 18 1962

Subbanna S. Vs. Labour Court and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-18-1962

Reported in: (1964)ILLJ702Kant; (1963)1MysLJ547

ORDERSomnath Ayyar, J.1. The two petitioners are employees in a project known as the Bhadra Reservoir Project and their services were terminated as a result of some misconduct which was imputed to each of them. But, in a reference under S. 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Labour Court recorded a finding that the termination of their services could not be defended, since, in its opinion, the termination was without an enquiry into the misconduct imputed to them. But the Labour Court, however, thought that it was not necessary to make an order for their reinstatement. What it directed was that each of the petitioners should be awarded retrenchment compensation computed on the basis provided by S. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. It is urged that since reinstatement in a case in which the termination is decided to be unsupportable is the rule, the substitution of compensation being only an exception, we should now quash that part of the award by which reinstatement was r...


Dec 07 1962

G.K. Thammanna Vs. the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Second Circle ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-07-1962

Reported in: [1963]14STC711(Kar)

ORDERTukol, J. 1. These are two revision petitions by an assessee challenging the orders passed by the Additional First Class Magistrate, Bangalore, direction the issue of warrants under section 13(3)(b) of the Mysore Sales Tax Act for recovery of amounts due from him in regard to arrears of sales tax as if the amounts were fine imposed by him on the assessee. 2. The facts leading to the present proceedings are not in dispute. The petitioner is a dealer in potatoes. He was assessed to sales tax for the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60 under section 5(1) of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957, as amended by Act No. IX of 1958. The Commercial Tax Officer served a notice under section 13(2) of the Act on the petitioner on 4th April, 1962, requiring him to pay all the arrears of tax along with penalty on or before 16th April, 1962. On the petitioner's failure to pay the same within the aforesaid date, the Commercial Tax Officer field two petitions before the First Class Magistrate, Bangalor...


Dec 04 1962

C.K. Chandrasekhariah and anr. Vs. State of Mysore and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-04-1962

Reported in: AIR1963Mys232

Somnath Iyer, J.1. Three lands bearing survey Nos. 43, 69 and 78 situate in the inam village of Itkalapura in Bangalore District which vested in the Government under the provisions of the , 1954 form the subject-matter of this writ petition. After the inam village vested in the Government under the provisions of Section 3 of the Act, the two petitioners who were the inamdars of that village made an application to the Deputy Commissioner functioning under the Act, under Section 9, for an order that they should be registered as the occupants of those three lands. A Tahsildar made a report to the Deputy Commissioner in the matter under Rule 7 of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Rules, 1956, and, on the basis of that report, the Deputy Commissioner declined to register the petitioners as the occupants of those lands, but instead came to the conclusion that the 3rd respondent was a quasi-permanent tenant of two of those lands, and, a tenant of the third for the purpos...


Dec 04 1962

B.K. Narayana Singh Vs. H.H. Mohum Shumshere Jung Bahadur and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Dec-04-1962

Reported in: AIR1963Mys244; (1963)1MysLJ145

ORDERK.S. Hegde, J.1. In this revision petition, the scope of Sections 31, 32 and 33 of the Mysore Stamp Act, 1957, comes up for consideration.2. The first respondent produced into the Court, an award with a prayer that the same may be made into a decree of the Court. The petitioner contended that the award in question was not duly stamped and therefore It is inadmissible In evidence. At one stage, the arguments centered round the question whether in the matter of stamping an award, the total value of the estate which is the subject matter of the award should be taken into consideration or whether the relief granted should be taken into consideration. The Court expressed its opinion that the total value of the estate should be the criteria. But it did not dispose of the question whether the award had been duly stamped as the respondents' learned Counsel wanted to cite authorities in support of his contention that the award is duly stamped. At a later stage, It was urged on behalf of th...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial