Karnataka Court August 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.
Ganjam Nagappa and Sons Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-10-1967
Reported in: [1968]21STC188(Kar)
Somnath Iyer, J. 1. The question which arises in this revision petition is whether in respect of the turnover of the petitioner for the assessment year 1963-64 sales tax was payable under the proviso to section 5(1) or at the higher rate specified in Second Schedule to the Act. The petitioner is a jeweller, and, when he produced his return before the Commercial Tax Officer he advanced the contention that some part of the turnover included labour charges which could not be taxed. The finding of the Commercial Tax Officer was that the petitioner sold finished articles of jewellery and that no portion of the turnover could be regarded as labour charges. But he thought that the sales consisted of distinct sales of component parts of a manufactured jewel. According to him when there was a sale of a jewel in which a precious stone had been set, there was a sale of that precious stone and a sale of the gold in which it was embedded. The position, he thought, was similar when there was a sale ...
Khaje Khanavar Khadskhan Hushenkhan and anr. Vs. Siddavanhalli Nijalin ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-08-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant18; AIR1968Mys18
ORDER(1) At the General Elections of this year 1967. Mr. Siddavanahalli Nijalingappa who was at that time and still continues to be the Chief Minister of Mysore was returned unopposed to the Mysore Legislative Assembly from the Shiggaon Constituency of Dharwar District.(2) At the said election Khajekhanavar Khadarkhan Hussiankhan, the first petitioner in this petition, was one of the candidates who had presented nomination. The second petitioner Gangadhar Vasudev Joshi is an elector in that constituency and a friend of the first petitioner. In the petition filed by them they pray that the election of Mr. Nijalingappa as aforesaid be declared void and that the first petitioner be declared duly elected.(3) Mr. Nijalingappa is impleaded as the first respondent.(4) The essence of the case as stated in the petition which I shall summarise presently and to the details of which I shall refer whenever necessary in appropriate context, is that the first respondent had not field or caused to be ...
The State of Mysore Vs. A.K. Khoja and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-07-1967
Reported in: [1968]21STC354(Kar)
Somnath Iyer, J. 1. We dismiss these five revision petitions since we are not satisfied that they are fit cases for admission. The admitted tax payable by the dealer under the second proviso to section 20(1) of the Sales Tax Act as it stood before its amendment, was the tax payable on the turnover admitted by him in the return produced by him. The fact that he did not appeal from one part of the assessment order made by the Commercial Tax Officer does not mean that the tax determined by the Commercial Tax Officer in respect of which there was no appeal was tax which the dealer admitted to be due. The tax becomes payable in that contingency in respect of that matter, not because there was an admission by the dealer but because there was a determination by the Commercial Tax Officer. The contention urged before us overlooks the distinction between an admission and an adjudication. In our opinion, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in taking the view that no further tax was payabl...
Ratnamala Vs. State of Mysore and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-02-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant216; AIR1968Mys216; (1968)1MysLJ599
Chandrashekhar, J. (1) In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has assailed the constitutionality of the provisions of the Madras Aliyasantana (Mysore Amendment) Act, 1961. The State of Mysore has been impleaded as Respondent-because of the challenge to the constitutionality of the Act passed by the Mysore State Legislature. The learned Advocate-General appeared for the State and defended the constitutionality of the provisions of the Act.(2) The petitioner belongs to the section of Jain Community in South Kanara District which is governed by the Aliyasanthana system of personal law. The genealogy of the family is set out in the table below:-RATNAMALA(Petr.)_______________________________|_______________________________ | | | | Padmavati Nagakumar Ratna Kumar Bhaskara alias ails R. 3 R. 4 Bhagyakumar Kasturi R.5 R. 2 _____|______________ | | Prasantha Unnamed Female R. 6 R. 7(3) Respondents 2 and 3 filed a suit O. S. 76/1962 on the file of the then Subordina...
Kappa Puttanna Ningaiah Vs. M.S. Sreeman
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-02-1967
Reported in: 1967CriLJ1726
ORDERAhmed Ali Khan, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the First Class magistrate Bamanagaram dated 24th April 1967 made in Criminal Mis. case No. 77 of 1966 on the file of his Court. By that order the Magistrate held that the respondent was in possession of the disputed land at the time of the attachment and prior thereto.2. The main grievance of the Advocate of the petitioner is that although the Magistrate has referred to the affidavits filed on behalf of the petitioner, he has neither considered nor discus, sad the same. According to him, deponents in four affidavits filed on behalf of the petitioner were cultivators of adjacent lauds and the Magistrate has not given any reason for discarding their evidence.3. It has been fairly conceded on behalf of the respondent, I think rightly, that the Magistrate has not given his reasons for arriving at the conclusion with regard to the possession of the disputed land. However it is argued by the learned Advocate f...
H.R. Annamalai Mudaliar Vs. Devaraja Urs and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-01-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Kant140; AIR1968Mys140; (1967)2MysLJ323
ORDER(1) This Election Petition relates to the election of a Member to the Mysore Legislative Assembly from the Hunsur Assembly Constituency, in the elections held on 15-2-1967. The respondent was declared duly elected by the Returning Officer on 21-2-1967.(2) The petitioner and the respondent amongst others filed their nomination papers before Returning Officer in response to the Notification in the Official Gazette of Mysore dated 13-1-1967 calling for nominations. The nomination papers were scrutinised on 21-1-1967. The respondent raised objections to the nomination of the petitioner contending that the Public Works Department of the Government of Mysore in the course of his business as a licensed Public Works Department Contractor, and therefore was disqualified to stand for Elections to the Mysore Legislative Assembly. The Returning Officer, after giving an opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence in support of their respective contentions, rejected the nomination paper of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›