Karnataka Court March 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.
Official Liquidator, High Court of Mysore Vs. T. Muniswamy Achary and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-1967
Reported in: [1969]39CompCas145(Kar); (1967)1MysLJ449
Narayana Pai, J.1. As there were many persons from whom monies Were due to the company, the liquidator under my direction originally took all notices to all such debtors under section 477 of the Companies Act, which were dealt with under Single Application No. 26/1965. Majority of the debtors served with notice appeared in court and admitted the claims made against them by the liquidator on behalf of the company. In some cases where there was dispute or lack of agreement about the exact amount due, the parties and the liquidator after looking into the relevant papers, reported to me agreement between them about the exact extent of the liability. In all those cases decrees by consent were passed. 2. In regard to cases where there was some dispute to be gone into and in cases where parties served with notice did not appear, I. made a general direction that the liquidator may take out applications in the nature of suits separately against such parties. 3. The application mentioned above i...
The Official Liquidator, High Court of Mysore, Bangalore Vs. T. Munisw ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Kant190; AIR1967Mys190
ORDER1. As there were many persons from whom monies were due to the Company, the Liquidator under my direction originally took out notices to all such debtors under Section 477 of the Companies Act, which were dealt with under single Application No. 26/1965 Majority of the debtors served with notice appeared in Court and admitted the claims made against them by the Liquidator on behalf of the Company. In some cases where there was dispute or lack of agreement about the exact amount due, the parties and the Liquidator after looking into the relevant papers, reported to me agreement between them about the exact extent of the liability. In all those cases decrees by consent were passed. 2. In regard to cases where there was some dispute to be gone into and in cases where parties served with notice did not appear. I made a general direction that the Liquidator may take out applications in the nature of suits separately against such parties. 3. The application mentioned above is one such su...
The Management of the Bangalore Woollen, Cotton and Silk Mills Co. Ltd ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Kant172; AIR1967Mys172; (1968)ILLJ514Kant
Govinda Bhat, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, preferred by the Management of the Bangalore Woollen, Cotton and Silk Mills Co., Ltd., Bangalore, hereinafter called the Management, for a writ of Prohibition or such other writ, rule, order or direction, directing the Labour Court Bangalore, not to proceed with the enquiry Ref. No. 41 of 1964 pursuant to the Government's Order No. PLM 376 LLD 62 dated 23rd July, 1964. The material facts stated briefly are:In June 1956, the Management purporting to act under the provisions of its Standing Order 8(ii), terminated the services of one of its workmen Sri A. Ramachandran for alleged absence without leave. As an industrial dispute between the Management and its workmen was pending before the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore in I. D. No. 11/55 at the time the said Ramachandran was deemed to have left the Management's service, he filed a complaint under Section 38A of the Industrial Disputes Act (Central Act 14 of 1947)...
Channegowda Vs. Mallinath
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-14-1967
Reported in: [1970]40CompCas489(Kar); (1967)1MysLJ657
Somnath Iyer, J.1. The plaintiff and the defendant made competing claims to the sum of Rs. 1,319 due under an insurance policy issued to a certain Rudramma by the Mysore Government, Insurance Department. Rudramma died on February 27, 1955. During her lifetime she had made a nomination in favour of her son-in-law who is the defendant. 2. On JUne 21, 1948,. she addressed a letter to the insurer to the 4effect that the nomination in favour of her son-in-law had been cancelled and that the insured should direct the son-in-law who was detaining the insurance policy with him to deliver it to her. Exhibit D-6 was the reply sent by the insurer to Rudramma by which she was informed that cancellation of the nomination in favour of the son-in-law had been recorded in the books of the insurer and that Rudramma might take necessary action to recover the policy from her son-in-law and produce it for endorsement of cancellation. She was also informed that the nomination in favour of her co-wife's son...
Narayan Hosabhayya Naik Vs. State of Mysore by Its Chief Secretary, Vi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant73; AIR1968Mys73
Govinda Bhat, J.(1) In this writ petition preferred under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the transfer to, and absorption in, of respondents 2 to 12 in the cadre of Assistants in the Mysore Government Secretariat Services, and giving them seniority and promotion over the petitioner. The facts so far as they are material may be briefly stated:The petitioner who had entered service as an Assistant in the Bombay Secretariat Service on 17-10-1955, was allotted to the New State of Mysore consequent on the Reorganization of States and since then he has been serving in the Mysore Government Secretariat. Respondents 2 to 10 with exception of respondents 8 and 9 were serving in the Translation Department of the erstwhile State of Mysore, and respondents 8 and 9 are allottees from the erstwhile States of Hyderabad and Madras respectively, to the new State of Mysore under Section 115 of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, hereinafter called the Act. Responden...
G.R. Jayarama Reddy Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: [1968]68ITR813(KAR); [1968]68ITR813(Karn)
Narayana Pai, J.1. In this reference at the instance of the assessee relating to his assessment for the assessment year 1957-58, the question referred is : 'When the assessee has filed a return of loss and when the Income-tax Officer has concluded the assessment as N. A. (not assessable) whether the assessment must be presumed to have been completed under section 23(1) of the Act, and whether the loss returned must be deemed to have been determined and accepted ?' 2. The return of loss referred to in the question was with reference to the immediately preceding assessment year 1956-57, in which he declared a loss of Rs. 12,862. The In come-tax Officer issued office to him under section 23(2) and 22(4) and concluded he assessment with the following observations : 'So this case falls under the higher exemption limit of Rs. 8,400. N. A. for 1956-57.' 3. The assessee throughout this assessment contended that the above order of the preceding year had the legal effect of accepting the loss of...
M. Puttanna Setty Vs. State of Mysore and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-06-1967
Reported in: [1968]67ITR358(KAR); [1968]67ITR358(Karn); (1967)1MysLJ505
Narayana Pai, J. 1. The petitioner's father, against whom an order of assessment had been made under the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act preferred an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, on the failure of which a further appeal was filed before the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax. The father having died, the petitioner is now continuing the proceedings. 2. It appears that, on the papers of the appeal presented to the Commissioner, a note had been made by one of the clerks or officials of the Commissioner's office that the appeal was incompetent for the reason that the order appealed from had neither enhanced the tax liability nor imposed any penalty. This was one of the conditions precedent for a competent appeal to the Commissioner under section 34 of the Act as it stood before the enactment. 3. Before the Commissioner could apply his mind to the appeal, the Act got amended. One of the major changes made by the amendment was giving a right of appeal...
Narayan Seshayya Naik Vs. State of Mysore and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-06-1967
Reported in: (1969)IILLJ1Kant; (1968)2MysLJ299
ORDERGovinda Bhat, J1. In this writ petition preferred under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the transfer to, and absorption in, of respondents 2 to 12 in the cadre of assistants in the Mysore Secretariat Service, and giving them seniority and promotion over the petitioner. The facts so far as they are material may be briefly stated. 2. The petitioner who had entered service as an assistant in the Bombay Secretariat Service on 17 October, 1955, was allotted to the new State of Mysore consequent on the Reorganization of States and since then, he has been serving in the Mysore Government Secretariat. Respondents 2 to 10 with the exception of respondents 8 and 9 were serving in the Translation Department of the erstwhile State of Mysore, and respondents 8 and 9 are allottees from the erstwhile States of Hyderabad and Madras respectively, to the new State of Mysore under S. 115 of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, hereinafter called the Act. Responde...
Balachandra Chengappa Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-05-1967
Reported in: [1968]67ITR372(KAR); [1968]67ITR372(Karn)
Somnath Iyer, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, whose income was assessed by the income-tax authorities, owed a sum of Rs. 18,783.75 P. towards the arrears of tax, and the Parupathegar of the Nad Office, Coorg, who is respondent No. 3, called upon him on April 14, 1965, to pay up the arrears, and intimated him that, in default, his landed property would be forwarded to the concerned revenue authority a certificate under section 46 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. 2. The petitioner challenges this demand and the ground on which the challenge rests is that, as early as on September 11, 1958, a promissory note for Rs. 1,00,000 executed by the petitioner's debtors had been delivered to the Income-tax Officer for collection and appropriation towards the arrears of the tax due from him, and that the neglect on the part of the Income-tax Officer to make the collection of the debt, exonerated the petitioner from his liability to pay the arrears of tax. 3. In the counter-affid...
S.M. Ananda Rao and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-1967
Reported in: [1968]67ITR675(KAR); [1968]67ITR675(Karn); (1967)2MysLJ352
Venkatswami, J. 1. These writ petitions have been preferred by four divided brothers, all sons of one S. L. Mannaji Rao, challenging the orders in revision passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore, Bangalore, under section 264(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and section 25(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. Each of the petitioner has preferred two separate petitions questioning the orders of the Commissioner both under the Income-tax Act and the Wealth-tax Act. 2. The assessment year in question in all these petition is 1963-64. The granting of relief to the petitioner depends on the determination of the question whether the writ petitioner, who are all assessees both under the Income-tax Act and the Wealth-tax Act, should be assessed as individuals or as members of a Hindu undivided family. In these circumstances, it is sufficient to consider the facts in one set of these writ petitions, filed by S. M. Ananda Rao, namely, Writ Petition No. 265 of 1966 and Writ Petition No. 272 of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »