Karnataka Court June 1971 Judgments
Lakshmidas Vs. Aroorchand and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant61; AIR1972Mys61; (1971)2MysLJ483
ORDERH.B. Datar, J.1. The plaintiff is the petitioner in this revision petition. O. S. No. 22 of 1968 has been filed by him for accounts of the dissolved partnership firm known as Aroorchand Shamsnnder of which the plaintiff was one of the partners. In paragraph 11 of the plaint the valuation of the suit has been given and it reads thus:'The plaintiff is prepared to pay the court-fee due on his share of the profits, after the same is duty ascertained. In order to initiate the taking of accounts in this suit, the plaintiff approximately estimates his share therein after all payments are made to him so far at Rs. 1000/- and court-fee of Rs. 75/- is paici thereon under Section 34 of the Mysore Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958.'It appears that the defendants contended that the valuation made therein was not correct and accordingly several issues were raised on the pleadings, but issue No, 3 is the issue with which we are concerned which reads:'Whether the suit is undervalued for th...
Tag this Judgment!The Canara Public Conveyance Co. Ltd., Mangalore Vs. the Regional Tran ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Kant356; AIR1971Mys356; (1971)2MysLJ279
A. Narayana Pai, C.J. 1. The petitioner is a company engaged in the business of public transport with its Headquarters at Mangalore. For some time during the year 1966-67, the Regional Transport Officer. Mangalore, used to issue special permits under Sub-section (6) of Section 63 of the Motor Vehicles Act for transporting passengers from Mangalore in Mysore State to Bombay in the State of Maharashtra. By virtue of the special provisions of the said sub-section, it is not necessary to secure the counter-signature of any Regional Transport Authority in the Maharashtra State although the route is an inter-State one. It would appear that the grantees of such special permits were guilty of several charges of abuse and some of their servants also prosecuted or convicted by the State of Maharashtra, The State Government of Maharashtra addressed a letter to the State Government of Mysore bringing to its notice what it considered to be an unsatisfactory state of affairs arising out of the grant...
Tag this Judgment!Vittaldas Bhagwandas Darbar and ors. Vs. Gurulingappa Channagowdappa P ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-11-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant127; AIR1972Mys127; (1971)2MysLJ641
M. Sadanandaswamy, representatives1. In R. S. A. 285/68, the appellants are the legal representatives of the 6th defendant and respondent No. 1 is the plaintiff. Respondents 2 to 6 are the defendants 1 to 5. In R. S. A. 576/66 the appellants are defendants 3 and 4, respondent 1 is the plaintiff and respondent 2 is the second defendant. According to the plaintiffs, the suit lands bearing survey Nos. 76 and 80 of Hirebevannur village in Indi Taluk, originally belonged to three brothers. Bheema Rao. Bavan Rao and Ranga Rao, sons of Panduranga Rao. They were living separately and they were enjoying the usufruct of the lands separately. Bheemarao had incurred a debt on a promissory note with the plaintiff. The plaintiff obtained a decree against him in Civil Suit No. 7/30 for recovery of money due on the pronote. On 16-1-30, there was an award decree and it created a charge on the undivided l/3rd interest of Bheemarao in the suit lands for the amount due to the plaintiff under the decree. A...
Tag this Judgment!B.V. Veerathradhya Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Bangal ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1971
Reported in: [1973]87ITR193(KAR); [1973]87ITR193(Karn)
Govinda Bhat, J.1. These are two revision petitions preferred by an assessee under the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, hereinafter called 'the Act'. They relate to the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66. 2. The assessee grows coffee, areca and mangoes. The method of accounting regularly employed the assessee in cash basis. The assessing authority, while assessing the income for the assessment years prior to 1964-65, had computed the assessee's income from coffee crop on the basis of valuation on the points declared by the Indian Coffee Board in respect of such crop under the 2nd proviso to section 7 of the Act. For the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 and the assessee submitted returns of his income on the cash basis of accounting but the assessing authority, while accepting the income in respect of areca and mangoes on the cash basis, computed the income from coffee crop in accordance with the 2nd proviso to section 7 as in the earlier assessments. The reason given is ...
Tag this Judgment!Venkatappa Vs. S.N. Venkateshaiah and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant119; AIR1972Mys119; (1971)2MysLJ348
ORDERH.B. Datar, J. 1. Petitioner in these revision petitions is the defendant. Plaintiff-respondents filed two suits O. S No 152 of 1967 and O. S. No. 130 of 1967, for recovery of certain amount due to mem. The defendant is the same in both the suits. Two issues were raised as to whether the defendant was an agriculturist as defined by Section 2 of the Mysore Agriculturists Relief Act at the time of the suit transactions and whether the suit was in lime. The learned trial Judge recorded the evidence and came to the conclusion that the defendant was an agriculturist as defined by Section 2 of the Mysore Agriculturists Relief Act, and therefore, held that the suit was within time. It is the correctness of the findings on these issues that is challenged in these two revision petitions.2. Sri N. Raghupathy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in both the petitions, contended that the finding that the income of the petitioner was only Rs. 1500/- per year was not justified by the e...
Tag this Judgment!Narasinga Gowda and anr. Vs. Subramanya Saralaya
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant346; AIR1972Mys346; (1972)2MysLJ186
ORDERR.B. Datar, J.1. Petitioners are the defendants in O. S No. 257 of 1968 on the file of the Munsiff at Buntwal, S. K. An application I. A. II was filed for temporary injunction by the plaintiff and that was granted. It appears that parties filed a joint memo on 6th March 1969 stating that without prejudice to the contentions by the parties a receiver may be appointed to look after the areca garden mentioned in the plaint A schedule and Sri N. B. Angraja may be appointed as the receiver. The terms were also stipulated therein that the receiver shall not lease the property to any one and he shall appoint a servant for the purpose of watering and looking after the areca garden. Provision was also made therein for the purpose of payment and maintenance expenses incurred by the receiver. On this memo, the trial Court appears to have passed an order appointing the receiver with regard to the property mentioned in the joint memo. The receiver took possession of two items of property. The ...
Tag this Judgment!S.N. Seshadri Vs. Managing Director, L.i.C., Bombay
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-08-1971
Reported in: (1972)ILLJ379Kant; (1971)2MysLJ311
ORDER1. The petitioners in these three cases were employees of the Life Insurance Corporation. In certain disciplinary enquiries held against them by the Zonal Manager they were found guilty of one or other of the charges framed against them, and the penalty of dismissal was imposed upon them. Upon appeal to the Managing Director the appeals were dismissed by short orders, suggesting and supporting the case of the petitioner that the appellate authority had not applied his mind fully to the facts and circumstances of the case, as he was bound to, in the light of Regulation 46(2) of the Staff Regulations of the Life Insurance Corporation which are modelled on similar rules contained in the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules governing Government servants. 2. Whatever may be the position regarding the regularity of the original enquiry and infirmities if any, in the report of the enquiring officer, as to which we express no opinion, there appears little doubt that t...
Tag this Judgment!S.N. Sheshadri and ors. Vs. Managing Director, Life Insurance Corporat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant13; AIR1972Mys13
A. Naravana Pai, C.J. 1. The Petitioners in these three cases were employees of the Life Insurance Corporation. In certain disciplinary enquiries held against them by the Zonal Manager, they were found guilty of one or other of the charges framed against them, and the penalty of dismissal was imposed upon them. Upon appeal to the Managing Director, the appeals were dismissed by short orders, suggesting and supporting the case of the petitioners that the Appellate Authority had not applied his mind fully to the facts and circumstances of the case, as he was bound to, in the light of Regulation 46 (2) of the Staff Regulations of the Life Insurance Corporation which are modelled on similar rules contained in the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules governing Government servants.2. Whatever may be the position regarding the regularity of the original enquiry and infirmities, if any, in the report of the Enquiring Officer, as to which we express no opinion, there appear...
Tag this Judgment!T.M. Rangappa and Bros. and ors. Vs. the Mysore Revenue Appellate Trib ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-07-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant39; AIR1972Mys39; (1971)2MysLJ303
E.S. Venkataramiah, J. 1. The petitioners in all these Writ Petitions were applicants for the grant of different stage carriage permits under the provisions of Section 45 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before the concerned Regional Transport Authorities to operate stage carriages within the region over which the concerned Regional Transport Authorities had jurisdiction and had been granted permits to do so. But all these permits were set aside in appeal either by the Mysore State Transport Appellate Tribual (hereinafter referred to as the M. S. T- A. T.) or the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the M. R. A. T.) on the ground that the Regional Transport Authorities had not followed the procedure enunciated in R. Obliswami Naidu v. Addl. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Madras, : [1969]3SCR730 - Aggrieved by the said orders setting aside the grants made in their favour, the petitioners have filed the above petitions questioni...
Tag this Judgment!Sharmila Jewellery and ors. Vs. the Assistant Collector of Central Exc ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Kant132; AIR1972Mys132
Venkataswami, J.1. In these four petitions common questions have arisen for consideration, and, therefore, they are disposed of together by this common order. The petitioners applied for the grant of Dealer's Licences presumably under Section 27 (5) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Their applica-tions were disposed of under Section 27 (6) of the Act read with Rule 2 of the Rules framed thereunder. In all these cases they were denied licences prayed for. The two reasons on the basis of which the applications were rejected can be gathered from the orders communicated to the applicants. It is sufficient for our purpose to set out that portion of the order contained in the letter dated 27-10-1969 addressed to the petitioner in W. P. 7508/69. The portion runs thus :--'(i) There are already three licensed gold dealers in the area, and taking into consideration the turnover for the past few years, it is felt that there is no justification for increasing th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »