Karnataka Court October 1971 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.
In Re: Surchand Ramji Chavan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-21-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ1108
1 The appellant Surchand Ramji Chavan (A-l) was tried along with three others for the murder of one Motimala, in the court of the Sessions Judge at Chitradurga in Sessions Case No. 16/69 on his file. By his judgment dated 30th November 1970, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the other three accused namely A-2, A-3 and A-4, but however, convicted A-l under Section 302, I. P.C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. This appeal is against the said conviction and sentence.2. Motimala was a resident of Bombay, residing at Mohideen road, Arab Kalab, Shop No. 1. Bombay-8. He was a dealer in empty tins. He was supplying tins to B. T. Oil Jviills at Davangere. Surchand Ramji Chavan (A-l) was also a resident of Bombay and he was known to Motimala. He was also dealing in empty tins and supplying them to B. T. Oil Mills at Davangere. Some time in the year 1968 A-l left Bombay and came and took up a temporary residence at Davangere. He took a land near Geethanjali Talkies on lease from P. ...
Lakshmibai Vs. Income-tax Officer, Davangere Circle, Davangere
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR804(KAR); [1972]86ITR804(Karn)
Govinda Bhat, J. 1. A Hindu undivided family by name, Amberkar Virupanna Doddayellappa & Sons, was an assessee under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the Income-tax Act, 1961. The said assessee returned an income for the assessment year 1962-63 on April 27, 1967. The assessing authority dropped the said proceedings by his order dated April 14, 1968, The karta of the Hindu undivided family was Doddayellappa who died on October 14, 1968. Doddayellappa was survived by his wife, Lakshmibai, the petitioner herein and two sons. On December 23, 1969, the respondent issued a notice to the petitioner under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter called 'the Act' stating that he has reason to believe that the income of the petitioner's Hindu undivided family for 1962-63 has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act and that he proposes to assess the income for the said assessment year. Therefore, he directed the petitioner to file her return in the prescrib...
Virbhadra Devaru Gokak Vs. Gajanan and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant207; AIR1972Mys207
H.B. Datar, J.1. One Venkatesh Anantrao Mutalik Desai appears to have transferred his l/3rd interest in the C. T, Survey Numbers situated at Gokak. Thereafter a suit was filed on behalf of Virabhadra Devaru by its Shebait and Mukhatyar for declaration that he is entitled to l-3rd share of the suit schedule properties and for partition. A decree was passed reserving liberty to the judgment-debtors to make an application under the provisions of the Partition Act. Accordingly, on behalf of the judgment-debtors, an application was filed on 18-7-1966 under the provisions of Section 4 of the Partition Act, offering to purchase l/3rd share of the decree-holder. The learned trial Judge considered that application and granted the same. He ordered that a Commissioner should be appointed to make valuation of the property and permitting the judgment-debtors to purchase the share of the decree-holder in the property. The correctness of this order was challenged before the Civil Judge, Belgaum in Ex...
Sajjeda Veeranna Vs. Gownder Erasayamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant238; AIR1972Mys238
ORDERH.B. Datar, J. 1. The landlord is the petitioner in this revision application. A petition for resumption of land under Section 14 of the Mysore Land Reforms Act. 1961 was filed. That case was fixed for arguments. Arguments were heard on 6th April 1968 and the case was posted for pronouncement of judgment on 10-4-1968. The learned Judge, on 10-4-1968 pronounced the order granting the claim of landlord for resumption of land to the extent of 'half the area in question. The tenant thereafter preferred an appeal before the appellate Court on 14th April 1969 and made an application for condonation of delay if any. in preferring the appeal. The learned appellate Judge heard the application and the appeal and came to the conclusion that the question of limitation in filing the appeal does not arise and he further observed that even if there is any delay in preferring the appeal, there is sufficient cause for condoning the delay and it is accordingly condoned. Accordingly the learned appe...
Gurushiddayya Kalkayya Selimath and ors. Vs. Shah Hirachand Vanechand ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-15-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant209; AIR1972Mys209; (1972)1MysLJ291
1. This is an appeal brought by defendants 1, 3, 6 and 7 in forma pauperis against the judgment and decree dated 30-11-1965 passed by the Civil Judge, Hubli, in Special Suit No. 15 of 1963 decreeing the suit for sale on the basis of a mortgage executed by the defendants in favour of theplaintiff 'Shah Hirachand Vanechand and Company' which is a registered Partnership firm carrying on business at Hubli. Defendants 2 to 7 are the sons of Defendant No. 1 and they are members of a Joint Hindu Family. The family of the defendants was carrying on business in Hubli; in respect of the dealings carried on with the plaintiff firm, a sum of Rs. 33,197/6/0 was found due according to the accounts. As the defendants were unable to pay the said amount, they executed on 20-10-1959 a mortgage of the suit properties in favour of the plaintiff firm for Rs. 34,000/-. The consideration for the mortgage was the sum of Rs. 33,197/6/0 due on accounts and a further sum of Rs. 802/10/0 paid in cash before the S...
The Official Receiver, Bangalore Vs. Sellamma and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-15-1971
Reported in: AIR1973Kant154; AIR1973Mys154; (1973)1MysLJ20
ORDER1. The above two Civil Revision Petitions are filed against a common order passed in Misc. Cases Nos. 187 and 189 of 1067 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge. Bangalore, on the two applications filed by the respondent in each of the above petitions under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the setting aside of the ex parte decree that had been passed in Original Suit No. 274 of 1964 on the file of the said Court. By its order dated 6-12-1969 the Lower Court allowed both the applications setting aside the preliminary decree and final decree passed in the said suit. The said suit was originally filed in the Court of the District Judge, Bangalore in Original Suit No. 58 of 1949-50, on the basis of a registered mortgage deed executed by defendants 1 and 2 therein for a recovery of sum of Rs. 31,725/- which was due on the mortgage deed by way of principal and interest thereon. The petitioner in Misc. Case No. 187 of 1967 is one B. N. Leelabai and she had ...
Waman Kallappa Kuttur Vs. Gundu Basalinga and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-14-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant240; AIR1972Mys240
ORDERK. Jagannatha Shetty, J. 1. This Revision Petition is directed against the Judgment of the First Additional District Judge, Belgaum, confirming an order of the Land Tribunal. Belgaum. refusing to issue a certificate to the landlord for resumption of the lands under the Mysore Land Reforms Act (shortly called the 'Act'). 2. Among the points raised in this revision petition, the substantial question is as to the meaning and scope of Rule 7 of the Mysore Land Reforms Rules, 1965. 3. The petitioner is the manager of a joint family owning lands S. Nos. 111 and 104/1 of Basarikatte village. Belgaum Taluk, which are in the possession of the tenants who are respondents before me. The petitioner filed a statement under Section 14 of the Act, before the Tribunal for resumption of the said lands on the ground that he bona fide requires the same for cultivation by his family. The Tribunal after enquiry held that the petitioner does not bona fide require the lands for cultivation and the incom...
Sri Venkateswara Oil Mills Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, I Circle, Banga ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-12-1971
Reported in: [1972]29STC10(Kar)
ORDERGovinda Bhat, J. 1. The petitioners a partnership firm are dealers under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, hereinafter called 'the Act'. For the period from 1st April, 1964, to 31st March, 1965, they furnished a return showing a total turnover of Rs. 7,90,495.78, of which they claimed exemption on a turnover of Rs. 5,05,825.85. The exemption claimed related to sales of groundnut seeds and groundnut cake. During the period 1964-65, under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957, tax was leviable on groundnut seeds at the point of last purchase and on groundnut cake at the point of first sale. On 10th November, 1964, in The State of Mysore v. Yaddalam Lakshminarasimhiah Setty & Sons : [1965]2SCR129 , the Supreme Court held that no tax could be levied under the Act if no tax could have been levied under the sales tax law of the appropriate State if that sale had taken place inside that State. Applying the said decision, the Commercial Tax Officer, First Circle, Bangalore (respondent No. 1), whi...
Sukumar and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-12-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ1402
ORDERS.R. Range Gowda, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the two preliminary orders dated 10-8-1971 and 17-8-1971 passed by the Additional District Magistrate Man-galore in M. C. No. 1 of 1971. The first order relates to Survey No. Ts. 183/A2B measuring 12 cents situate at Kodialbail village, and it reads:Whereas it has been made to appear to me and I am satisfied that a dispute exists between the parties specified above likely to cause a breach of peace concerning the possession of the property shown in the schedule attached at Kodialbail village property being situated within the local jurisdiction of this Court I Sri A. Viswanath Additional District Magistrate. Mangalore do hereby require you to attend my Court at Mangalore in person at 3.00 P. M. On 17-8-1971 and file written statements affidavits and documents if any in respect of your respective claims regarding the possession of the properties mentioned in. the schedule.2. The second order relates to Survey No. Ts....
Kamalamma Vs. Kenche Gowda and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant184; AIR1972Mys184
C. Honniah, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a suit instituted by the Plaintiff Kamalamma for a declaration that she is the owner of the suit lands and for a direction to defendants 1 to 4 to put her in possession and for mesne profits for the period prior to the suit and also for future mesne profits.2. The trial court negatived the claim of the plaintiff in so far as it related to Survey number 94 and decreed her claim in respect of survey number 92, the extent of which is 1-29 guntas.Against the said decision, the defendants 1 to 4 preferred an appeal in the court of the Civil Judge. Bangalore which confirmed the decree of the trial court. On appeal to this Court by defendants 1 to 4, this court set aside the decree of the appellate court and remanded the case to hear the appeal afresh and dispose of the same according to law. The Civil Judge, who heard the appeal has decided against the plaintiff and dismissed her suit. The plaintiff has preferred this appeal challenging the correct...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »