Karnataka Court March 1965 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.
Chandrasekhara Hebbar Vs. Vittala Bhandari
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Kant84; AIR1966Mys84; (1965)2MysLJ338
ORDER(1) On April 2, 1959 there was an agreement between the plaintiff and defendant 1 that a certain quantity of timber should be supplied by the plaintiff to defendant 1 for Rupees 7,600. It is not disputed that on August 7, 1959 there was an assignment of the benefit of the contract by defendant 1 in favour of defendant 2. Defendant 2 received from the plaintiff the timber which had to be supplied to defendant 1, and by then the plaintiff had already received from defendant 1 a sum of Rs. 1,600 and from defendant 2 a sum of Rs. 5,500. The balance which was still due to the plaintiff under the agreement was Rs. 500.(2) Since no one among the defendants paid the balance of purchase-money, the plaintiff brought a suit on December 20, 1960 for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 550 consisting of Rupees 500 which was the balance of the price, and, a sum of Rs. 50 which represented the interest from January 15, 1960 to October 15, 1960. The Munsiff gave the plaintiff the decree which he wanted ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Mysore Vs. N.G. Reddy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-12-1965
Reported in: ILR1965KAR537; [1965]58ITR232(KAR); [1965]58ITR232(Karn); (1965)2MysLJ505
1. By this application, the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Mysore at Bangalore, requires the Appellate Tribunal to refer to the High Court certain questions of law, which are said to arise out of the Tribunal's order dated 5th April, 1963, in W.T.A. No. 533 of 1962-63. Inasmuch as, in our opinion, questions of law do arise out of the aforesaid order, we hereby draw up an agreed statement of the case and refer it to the High Court of Mysore at Bangalore under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act. 2. N. G. Reddy is the karta of a Hindu undivided family. In the assessment to wealth-tax of the family for the assessment year 1957-58, the Wealth-tax Officer included a sum of Rs. 1,34,025 being the investments standing in the names of the assessee's relations as follow : Rs.(1) Mrs. N. Sarojini Devi - wife ... 69,261(2) N. Santhosh Reddy - son ... 34,707(3) Miss N. Saraswathi Reddy - unmarried daughter ... 16,534(4) Miss. N. Leenatha Devi - minor daughter ... 13,5333. The Wealth-tax Officer rejec...
Clifford (V.C.) Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-1965
Reported in: (1967)ILLJ374Kant; (1967)ILLJ376Kant; (1966)2MysLJ70
ORDERSadasivayya, J. 1. The petitioner was working as an assistant master at King George's School at Bangalore, in the service of Government of India, Defence Department. Certain charges had been framed against the petitioner in respect of some alleged misconduct on his part, the details of which it is not necessary to enter into at present. A board of enquiry had been appointed to hold an enquiry in respect of those charges which had been framed against the petitioner. In the month of November 1962, the Board gave its findings as per Annexure N 12 (to be found in the paper book supplied by the petitioner at p. 60). Thereafter, a show-cause notice dated 7 December, 1962 was served on the petitioner requiring him to show cause as to why he should not be removed from service. To that show-cause notice, the petitioner had sent a reply. Then, respondent 2, viz. The chief of the General Staff, Army Head Quarters, passed the order of removal dated 10 July, 1963 as per Annexure A; by that ord...
Bhatt Vs. B. Ratnakara Rao and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Kant147; AIR1966Mys147; (1965)1MysLJ731
ORDER(1) This revision petition springs from a suit brought by a lessor for the recovery of rent. The lease was an ancient mulgem lease between the ancestors of the plaintiff and the ancestors of defendant 1. It is not disputed that defendant 1 as the manager of the Hindu joint family to whom the lease was originally granted, was in occupation and possession of the land until 1959 paying the agreed rent to the plaintiff. But on May 11, 1955, under Exhibit B. 3 defendant 1 sold a portion of the property to defendant 2. He made yet another sale under Exhibit B. 4 on March 2, 1957 of the remaining property. On March 5, 1959 a registered notice Exhibit B. 1 was sent by both defendants 1 and 2 to the plaintiff intimating him that there was a sale. On February 26, 1963, the plaintiff brought his suit for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 159 which, according to him, was the rent due for a period of three years following the second sale under Exhibit B. 4. In the plaint, the plaintiff sought a dec...
Peirce, Leslie and Co. Ltd. Vs. Rama Moily
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-1965
Reported in: (1965)IILLJ41Kant; (1965)1MysLJ687
ORDER1. These three revision petitions arise out of an order made by the authority functioning under S. 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, directing the payment of retrenchment compensation to three employee and which was confirmed in appeal under S. 17 of that Act by the District Judge of South Kanara. 2. The respondents in these revision petitions were the employees and their employer was the petitioner-company. On December 14, 1959 all the three employees were served with notice by the company that their services were terminated with effect from December 22, 1959 on the ground of continued ill-health. Those notices stated that they had been subjected to medical examination by the company's medical officer and that the expert opinion gathered by the company demonstrated that the employees were no longer medically fit to perform their normal duties which were required of them in the factory belonging to the company. 3. After the termination of the services of the employees in this ...
Mundyappu Hengsu Vs. Sampa Alvathi and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-09-1965
Reported in: AIR1965Kant268; AIR1965Mys268; (1965)1MysLJ728
(1) On May 25, 1945, a certain Aithappa Alva granted a mortgage to the decree-holder Pinto of three items of properties belonging to him for securing repayment of sum of Rs. 9,000/-. In the year 1948, under Exhibit B2 there was a settlement of one of the properties belonging to Aithappa in favour of his sister. After this settlement, Aithappa died and Pinto brought a suit for the recovery of the amount due 'under the mortgage against the legal representatives of Aithappa who were Aithappa's widow, his children and his sister. A decree was made in that suit and when Pinto wished to execute the decree and asked for a sale of the mortgaged properties the widow and children asked for an order that the property which was settled on the sister should be sold in the first instance. There was also a prayer by the sister that the other properties should be sold in the first instance. On these applications the Munsiff made an order that the properties of the widow and children should be sold in ...
B. Abdul Ameed Mohamad Hayath Vs. Town Municipal Council, Chitradurga
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1965
Reported in: AIR1965Kant281; AIR1965Mys281
Hegde, J.(1) In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner seeks to get quashed the order made by the President of the Town Municipal Council, Chitradurga, in A5.1 to 6/64 dated 22-9-1964, cancelling the license granted to the petitioner and others to trade in beef.(2) The petitioner is a resident of Chitradurga. He was granted a license to slaughter cattle and trade in beef, on 13-3-1964. That license was renewed for a period of one year from 1-4-1964 to 31-3-1965 by an order dated 1-4-1964. In pursuance of that license, he was trading in beef in a place called Horepet within the limits of the Chitradurga Municipality. There appears to have been some agitation on the part of the Hindu community, objecting to the trade in beef. Finally the President of the Municipality issued the impugned order, which reads as follows:'S5. 1 to 6/64-65. Office of the President,Town Municipal Council,Chitradurga. M E M O ToShri B. Abdul Hammed,Beef Vendor, Chitradurga. Sir,...
Athni Municipality (by Its President) Vs. Shetteppa Laxman Pattan and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-02-1965
Reported in: (1965)IILLJ307Kant; (1965)1MysLJ749
ORDERHombe Gowda, C.J.1. The President, Athni Municipality, has, in these three petitions, filed under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 25 September, 1963 passed by the authority appointed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, for the Athni area in Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 3, 4 and 5 of 1961 directing the petitioner to pay wages for the work turned out by the respondents during the weekly holidays or rest days for the years 1955 to 1960. All the three petitions filed by the respondents before the authority appointed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, for the Athni area were tried and disposed of by a common order dated 25 September, 1963 by agreement of parties. Miscellaneous Application No. 2 of 1961 was also tried along with these petitions. But the said application was dismissed by the authority and the same has not been challenged by the petitioners in that application. The present petition...
In Re : Saibanna Tippanna and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-02-1965
Reported in: 1966CriLJ1155
A.R. Somnath Iyer, J.1. Accused 1, 2, 3 and 6 who were convicted by the Sessions Judge of Gulbarga of an offence of lurking house trespass punishable under Section 457, and, of an offence of murder punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, and, who were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years for the first offence and to imprisonment for life for the second, are the appellants before us.2. In the village of Naribol in the District of Gulbarga there was one Doddiah who was a rich landowner owning as large an estate as 1,200 acres of land. He died leaving behind him his minor son Sivamanappa. After the death of Doddiah, Sivamanappa's mother's sister Parvathamma assumed management of the minor's estate and continued to manage it until Sivamanappa attained majority, Sivamanappa gave Parvathamma when he resumed management of his own estate, some 60 acres of land for her own maintenance and thereafter Parvathamma was living separately from Siv...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›