Karnataka Court September 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.
Madiah Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-25-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mys191; 1963CriLJ23; (1963)1MysLJ318
ORDERT.K. Tukol, J.1. This is a petition for setting aside the order of dismissal of Criminal Revision Petition No. 337 of 1962, passed by this Court on 4-9-62. When that petition had been fixed for hearing on the aforesaid date, the Advocate for the petitioner was absent and he had not complied With the objections raised by the office with regard to the deficit court-fee. The application was accordingly rejected on the ground that the Advocate was absent and that there was no compliance with the objections.2. In the present petition, the learned Government Pleader has raised an objection that this Court has no power to review the former order of dismissal and that under the rules framed by this High Court, the matter should go before a Division Bench. In support of this contention, he has placed reliance on the provisions of Sections 9 and 10 of the Mysore High Court Act, 1961 (Mysore Act No. 5 of 1962), and contended that in view of the fact that Clause (v) of Section 10 expressly re...
State of Mysore Vs. Kashambi and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-25-1962
Reported in: 1963CriLJ226
K.S. Hegde, J.1. This is a reference under Section 438 Cr. P. C. made by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Saundatti, requesting this Court to decide whether the Notification issued by the Government of Mysore under its Order No, H. D. 24 C I. P. 48 dated 18-12-1958 is valid or not. The learned trial Magistrate is of the opinion that the said Notification is not valid in law.2. The facts material for the purpose of deciding the reference in question are as follows: One Kashambi and another Mohadinbi were prosecuted under Section 8 (a) of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956, which will be hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' in Criminal Cases No Section 337 and 339 of 1961 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Saundatti. When those cases were taken up for trial, the learned Counsel for the accused contended that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try the cases in question. After hearing arguments on that point, the...
The State of Mysore Vs. B. Mahabala Shetty and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mys77; 1963CriLJ306; ILR1962KAR848
H. Hombe Gowda, J.1. These two Criminal Appeals by the State are against two separate orders of acquittal passed by the First Class Magistrate, Virajpet, in S. T. R. 571 of 1961 and S. T. R. 1464 of 1961 respectively and involve the determination of the same question, viz., whether the failure of the Magistrate to give reasons for his order of acquittal in a case tried summarily under Section 264 of the Code of Criminal Procedure amounts to an illegality which vitiates the trial, hence they have been heard together and this judgment will govern both of them.2. In S. T. R. 571 of 1961 the charge against accused was that he was found in possession of two bottles which contained 16 drams of arrack without a permit and had thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 3(1) (a) of the Coorg Prohibition Act. In S. T. R. 1464 of 1961 the accusation against the respondent was that he was found moving in the streets of Virajpet having consumed arrack and in a state of intoxication on 24...
Basamma Vs. Shivamma and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Kant323
Mir Iqbal Husain, J.1. An, interesting question as to whether a decree in a partition suit not engrossed on a non-judicial stamp paper could be executed, arises in this appeal. Plaintiff filed a suit O. S. 487 of 1949-50 in the Court of the Munsiff, Nanjangud for partition and possession of half share in the schedule properties, against the defendants, who are respondents before this Court. The suit was ultimately compromised and the compromise decree was passed on 16-2-1950. This decree was not engrossed on a stamp paper. On 14-10-1957, the learned Munsiff ordered the decree to be drawn up on a stamp paper on application I. A. No. 1 filed by the decree-holder and it was so drawn up.2. The plaintiff decree-holder took out several executions to which I will refer a little later, all of which were dismissed excepting the fourth one viz. Ex. 1623 of 57 filed on 29-11-1957. To this last application viz. Ex. 1623/57, filed by the decree-holder, objection was taken by the judgment-debtors vi...
Spencer and Co. Ltd. Vs. Headquarters Assistant Commissioner of Labour ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-20-1962
Reported in: ILR1962KAR1000; (1963)IILLJ603Kant; (1963)1MysLJ245
ORDERNarayana Pal, J. 1. The petitioner Spencer & Co., Ltd., took disciplinary proceedings against respondent 2, their employee, at the relevant period, and dismissed him as a result of the enquiry by their proceedings dated 30 November, 1959. Respondent 2 thereupon presented an appeal under Sub-section (2) of S. 41 of the Mysore Shops and Establishments Act (II of 1948), to respondent 1, the Headquarters Assistant to the Commissioner of Labour in Mysore, who is the prescribed appellate authority under that section. 2. Respondent 1, by his order dated 12 September, 1960, allowed the appeal and made a direction apparently in the light of Sub-section (3) of S. 41 for payment to respondent 2 by the petitioner of an amount equal to the total of one month's wags in lieu of notice and six months' wages as compensation. 3. The writ petition is directed against the said order of respondent 1. 4. In the course of the hearing, apart from certain other errors said to have been committed by respon...
V.K. Kulkarni Vs. State of Mysore and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mys303
Somnath Iyer, J.1. This is the second occasion on which the announcement of the names of successful candidates by the Mysore Public Service Commission under the provisions of the Mysore Munsiffs (Recruitment) Rules, 1958 which will be referred to as the Rules is under impeachment before this Court. Those Rules were made by the Governor in the exercise of the power conferred on him by Article 234 of the Constitution. The conduct of a comprivate examination for the selection of the most suitable persons for appointment as Munsiffs was the main purpose of these Rules.2. Rule 6 directed the Mysore Public Service Commission which will be referred to as the Commission to conduct for that purpose a comprivate examination consisting of a written examination and a viva voce examination. The written examination was held on two days in 1960 and the viva voce examination commenced on March 1, 1961 and continued until March 10, 1961. On May 22, 1961 the Commission published a list of those candidat...
K. Shama Rao Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-13-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mys208
A.R. Somnath Iyer, J.1. The petitioner before us was an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department, and the 14th of December, 1961 was the date on which he would have normally retired after attaining the age of superannuation in accordance with the determination in regard to his real date of birth. But by an Official Memorandum of the 14th of August, 1958, it was provided that in all cases in which there was a review of the date of birth given by a Government servant, and some other date was determined to be the real date of birth, extension of service equal to half the period of difference between the date of birth as originally indicated in the government records and the revised date of birth should be granted if the government servant was physically fit and had a satisfactory record of service. On the 13th of December 1961, Government made an order under the provisions of this official memorandum that the petitioner's services should be extended for 11 months and 20 days from...
Mysore Iron and Steel Works, Bhadravathi Vs. Appellate Authority Under ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-12-1962
Reported in: ILR1962KAR986; (1963)IILLJ672Kant; (1963)1MysLJ371
ORDERNarayana Pai, J. 1. Certain standing orders governing the conditions of service of workmen in the Mysore Iron and Steel Works, Bhadravathi, were certified by the Commissioner of Labour functioning as certifying authority under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. 2. The workmen represented by their association which is respondent 2 in this petition filed an appeal under S. 6 against the said order before the appellant authority. The appellate authority modified the standing orders in so far as certain categories of leave and holidays were concerned and confirmed the same in all other respects. In regard to monthly rated staff, he gave four additional holidays as festival holidays on full pay. In regard to daily rated staff, he gave three additional holidays as festival holidays and also gave them the benefit of another category of leave called casual leave to the extent of three days on full wages and six days on half wages. 3. In this civil petition presented by...
Shivaraya Vs. Sharanappa and ors
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-11-1962
Reported in: AIR1965Kant34; AIR1965Mys34; (1967)1MysLJ414
ORDER(1) In the course of a miscellaneous proceeding pertaining to an application under Order 9, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Petitioner therein had filed an application which purported to be under the provisions of Order 39 and Section 151 of the C.P.C. On that application, he had obtained an ex parte Order of temporary injunction against the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application which purported to be under Order 39, Rule 4 of the C.P.C. The lower Court then set aside the Order of temporary injunction which it had passed. It is against this Order that the petitioner in the said proceeding under Order 9, Rule 9 of the C. P. C has now come up in revision.(2) Sri Manohar Rao Jahagirdar the learned Advocate for the respondent raised a preliminary objection to the effect that a revision was not maintainable and that the proper remedy for the petitioner was to go up in appeal, as provided in O. 43, Rule 1(r) of the C.P.C. As against this objection it has ...
Steel Construction Company Vs. their Workmen and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-10-1962
Reported in: (1965)IILLJ11Kant
Govinda Bhat, J.1. This is a writ petition preferred under Art. 226 of the Constitution by the management of the Steel Construction Company, Yeshwanthapur, against the award of the labour court, Bangalore, in LCS. No. 23/1957, dated 9 October, 1959, by which 28 workmen referred to in the order of reference made by the Government, were directed to be reinstated in the service of the petitioner 'in continuity of their service put in under the alleged contractor Thammayya.' Two questions were referred for adjudication of the labour court by the Government under S. 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act. These are : (1) Whether the 28 workmen specified in the statement appended to the order of reference were in the employment of the Steel Construction Company, Yeshwanthapur (2) Whether the said workmen were dismissed from service on 11 November, 1954 2. The petitioner contended that the said 28 workers were not workmen employed by them but were the employees of their contractor one Thammayya. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »