Skip to content

Karnataka Court February 1967 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.

Feb 10 1967

Narayan Laxman Mulerkhi Vs. Postmaster-general, Bangalore

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-10-1967

Reported in: [1967(15)FLR343]; ILR1967KAR913; (1967)IILLJ626Kant; (1967)2MysLJ163

Per Somnath Ayyar, J.1. A certain Malhari was one of the mazdoors employed by the Posts and Telegraphs Department for the creation of telephone lines along the railway track near the Desur railway station which was at a short distance from Belgaum. He was working there from October 4, 1961, and, at 6.30 a.m. on October 14, 1961, while he was returning with a bucket of water which he had collected from a stationary engine on the off-side of the Desur railway station, he was knocked down by an incoming passenger train and killed. His father made an ' application for the payment of a sum of Rs. 2,551 as compensation payable under the Workmen's Compensation Act which was dismissed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Belgaum, on the ground that the accident did not arise out of and in the course of employment. 2. So this appeal. 3. Evidence was produced by the appellant that the mazdoors who were employed by the posts and Telegraphs Department for the erection of the telephone l...


Feb 10 1967

In Re: Basawarajaswami

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-10-1967

Reported in: AIR1967Mys210; 1967CriLJ1536

1. The accused Basavarajaswamy who has been tried in Sessions Case No. 70/8/1964 in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Gulbarga, is convicted for the offences under Sections 467 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code, and also under Section 52 of the Indian Post Offices Act. He was sentenced for the offences of forgery and criminal misappropriation under Sections 467 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year and to pay a fine of Rs 1,000 in default to undergo it further term of rigorous imprisonment for three months under each count The Sessions Judge did not award any sentence under Section 52 of the Indian Post Office Act. The substantive sentences awarded were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the Basavarajaswamy was the Branch post Master of the Chintapally Branch Post Office in October. 1959 Mallikarjunappa (P.W. 1) gent a money order of an amount of Rs. 98 from Harsur Branch Post Office october 16, ...


Feb 09 1967

Gundathur Thimmappa and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-09-1967

Reported in: [1968]70ITR70(KAR); [1968]70ITR70(Karn)

A. Narayana Pai, J. 1. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family trading in cotton and other goods. Their accounting year is Deepavali to Deepavali. Their income for the accounting year May 20, 1946, to November 12, 1947, was assessed to tax under the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1948-49. During the scrutiny of accounts, the officer discovered the following entries purporting to be loans received from one Raja Sathyamma : Rs.28-11-1946 10,00023-12-1946 10,00025-12-1946 10,00006-01-1947 2,000----------Total : 32,000----------2. The officer refused to believes these entries as representing genuine loans. The explanations offered by the assessee were found by him to be unsatisfactory, with the result, he added the said sum to the income returned by the assessee. 3. Upon appeal by the assessee, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner agreed with the finding of the Income-tax Officer. He, however, pointed out that the proper categorisation of this sum should have been under the headin...


Feb 09 1967

B.B. Danganavar Vs. Income-tax Officer, Special Survey Circle, Dharwar

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-09-1967

Reported in: [1967]65ITR370(KAR); [1967]65ITR370(Karn); (1967)1MysLJ426

Narayana Pal, J. 1. The petitioner seeks the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent, Income-tax Officer, Special Survey Circle, Dharwar, to take up for consideration, and to dispose of, two returns made by him for purposes of the Income-tax Act in relation to assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64. 2. A few facts, which are of relevance to the writ petition, are the following : 3. The petitioner started a business in February, 1961, and adopted for maintenance of his account the Deepavali year. For a couple of years the business did not yield any profits but during the Deepavali year October 29, 1962, to November 16, 1963, the petitioner earned a fairly large profit. On October 24, 1964, he filed before the respondent three returns - the first, for the assessment year 1962-63, covering his account from January 21, 1961, to November 8, 1961, disclosing a loss of Rs. 5,000, the second, for the assessment year 1963-64, relating to his account November 9, 1961, to October 28, 1...


Feb 08 1967

Narasimhamurthi M.C. and ors. Vs. Director of Collegiate Education and ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-08-1967

Reported in: (1967)IILLJ606Kant; (1967)1MysLJ612

ORDERSadasivayya, J.1. The petitioners in these three writ petitions had been appointed purely on a temporary basis, as second division clerks and were employed in the first grade college at Kolar. Exhibit A, dated December 26, 1962, in each of these cases, is the order of appointment pertaining to the respective petitioner. In the last paragraph of Ex. A, it is categorically stated that the appointment is purely on a temporary basis and is liable to be terminated without notice. Subsequently by the order as per Ex. B, dated January 5, 1965, the services of these petitioners were terminated with immediate effect. 2. It would appear from the facts set out in the affidavits annexed to these three writ petitions that consequent upon the appointment of certain persons whose names had been registered at the Regional Employment Exchange at Bangalore, the services of these three petitioners who had been appointed purely on a temporary basis, were terminated as mentioned in Ex. B. The petition...


Feb 06 1967

M.V. Govindaraju Chetty and ors. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Hassan Ci ...

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-06-1967

Reported in: (1967)2MysLJ385; [1968]22STC46(Kar)

ORDERNarayana Pai, J. 1. Of the writ petitions mentioned above, all the petitions of 1965 and petitions Nos. 1256 to 1258 and 2121 to 2127 of 1966 have been admitted and notice served on the respondent. The respondent is represented by the learned Government Pleader. 2. The remaining petitions of 1966, namely, Nos. 2724 and 2727 to 2733 are awaiting admission. 3. The principal contention on behalf of the petitioners in all these cases is that the turnover subjected to tax under the Central Sales Tax Act could not have been rightly so subjected in view of the clear declaration of the law in three subsequent decisions of this Court reported in Yaddalam Lakshminarasimhiah Setty & Sons v. State of Mysore ([1962] 13 S.T.C. 583), Mysore Silk House v. State of Mysore ([1962] 13 S.T.C. 597) and Karnatak Coffee Company v. Commercial Tax Officer, Davangere ([1962] 13 S.T.C. 658), and the rulings of the Supreme Court upon appeal in those cases reported in State of Mysore v. Yaddalam Lakshminarasi...


Feb 03 1967

Hajee Abdul Sattar Sait and anr. Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Mysore

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-03-1967

Reported in: [1968]69ITR45(KAR); [1968]69ITR45(Karn)

Narayana Pai, J.1. In this reference under section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, made at the instance of the assessee by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the question referred is : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entire property held by the deceased valued at Rs. 12,23,794 was chargeable to estate duty ?' 2. The deceased mentioned in the question was one Mohammed Hussain Sait, who died on the 22nd of March, 1955. The value of Rs. 12,00,000 and odd mentioned above is the value determined for what the department considered to be the entire property held by the deceased, apparently upon the footing that it was his exclusive separate property held by him exclusively which devolved in its entirety upon his heirs by the rules of Mohammadan law relating to succession. The accountable persons were his two sons, Abdulla Sait and Sattar Sait, who, according to the department, would be some among the heirs of the deceased. 3. The contention put forward by ...


Feb 03 1967

Subbanna (N.R.) Vs. State of Mysore

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-03-1967

Reported in: (1969)ILLJ647Kant; (1967)1MysLJ358

ORDERKalagate, J.1. The petitioner who is working as a second division clerk in the office of the Official Receive, Bellary, has filed this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the Government order dated 6 March, 1964 declining to extend to him the benefits under the Government order dated 26 June, 1959. He has further prayed for a direction to the Government to grant him the said benefit by issuing a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or by any such order. 2. The petitioner N. R. Subbanna was appointed by the District Judge, Bellary, as a temporary clerk to work in the office of the Official Receiver, Bellary. He was confirmed by the District Judge by his order dated 30 January, 1961 with effect from 25 June, 1959 as a clerk in the Munsif's Court, Bellary. The petitioner gave a representation to the Official Receiver, Bellary, on 8 September, 1958 stating that he was eligible to draw the duty allowance of Rs. 10 per month as he was the onl...


Feb 03 1967

Rajagopala Prasad Vs. State of Mysore

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-03-1967

Reported in: 1968CriLJ419

ORDERK. Bhimiah, J.1. The petitioner has filed this Revision Petition against the order made by the learned Sessions Judge, Mysore, in Mysore Criminal Appeal No. 77 of 1965 confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the IInd Munsiff and First Class Magistrate, Mysore, in C.C. No. 1146 of 1964.2. The main question for decision is whether a Sessions Judge empowered under Section 17(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to be hereinafter referred to as the Code, to dispose of urgent applications by a Sessions Judge of an adjoining Division gets power to hear and dispose of criminal cases pending on the file of the adjoining Sessions Division?3. Briefly stated, the facts necessary for the determination of the above question are as follows:Sri A. Panchaksharaiah was working as Sessions Judge of Mysore District. He was to retire on 7.11.1965. The Registrar, High Court of Mysore, addressed a letter to Sri Panchaksharaiah which reads as follows: Sub : Handing over charge on attainingthe ...


Feb 02 1967

P. Vasudeva Setty Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Feb-02-1967

Reported in: [1967]65ITR172(KAR); [1967]65ITR172(Karn); (1967)1MysLJ510

Narayana Pai, J. 1. In compliance with the direction made but this court in C. Ps. Nos. 426 and 427 of 1961 under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, has referred the following question together with a statement of the case : 'Whether the appellate Tribunal was right in its view that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had competence to alter the finding of the Income-tax Officer to the effect that the portion of income in dispute is an undisclosed income from a know source to a finding that it is undisclosed income from undisclosed source.' 2. The petitions mentioned above related to two assessment year 1949-50 and 1950-51, respect of which two appeals were heard together and disposed of by a common order by the Appellate Tribunal. Before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, there were three appeals relating to three assessment years, namely, the two year mentioned above as well as the subsequent assessment year 1951-52....


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial