Karnataka Court November 1972 Judgments
irawwa Alias Kanchawwa and anr. Vs. Basalingappa Shiddappa Karikatti
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-29-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Kant238; AIR1973Mys238
B. Venkataswami, J.1. This second appeal is by the defendants in Special Civil Suit No. 19 of 1957, on the file of the Court of the then Civil Judge, Senior Division. Belgaum. It is directed against the judgment and decree made by the Second Additional District Judge, Belgaum, in Civil Appeal No. 50/65. 2. The relevant facts, briefly stated, are as follows. The suit of the respondent was for a declaration that the second appellant herein was not the adopted son of the first appellant the widow of one Basawantappa Karikatti It is also contended that by virtue of a Will executed by Basawantappa Karikatti on 26-4-1917, when he was hardly 18 years of age, the property should devolve upon the respondent's father after the death of the first appellant, the widow of Basawantappa Karikatti. Within three days of the execution of the Will, the testator died of cholera. It is alleged that the second appellant herein has been taken in adoption by the first appellant in the year 1955 contrary to th...
Tag this Judgment!Annapurana Bai Vs. F.M. Ganesh Dattatraya and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-28-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Kant221; AIR1973Mys221; (1973)1MysLJ217
B. Venkataswami, J.1. This appeal is by the First Judgment debtor in Darkhast No. 146 of 1963 on the file of the Court of the Munsiff at Kumta. It is directed against the judgment made by the Civil Judge at Karwar, in C. A. No. 129 of 1966. That was an appeal directed against an order made by the Munsiff, Kumta, in the aforesaid Dharkhast, directing recovery of the balance due under a decree made in O. S. No. 366 of 1957.2. It would appear that by virtue of an annuity agreement, wherein the appellant first judgment-debtor had agreed to Day certain sums of money, such payment being secured by the creation of a charge on several properties enumerated therein. In enforcement of that agreement, decrees were obtained against the first judgment debtor, as and when the annuity agreed became due end payable. The first of such decree was made in O. S. No. 216/ 54. The said decree was executed in Darkhast No. 312 of 56. whereby only a portion of the properties charged were brought to sale and pu...
Tag this Judgment!D.R. Puttanna Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-21-1972
Reported in: [1974]96ITR333(KAR); [1974]96ITR333(Karn)
Govinda Bhat, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it has been rightly held that no notice under section 142(1) was necessary to complete the assessment under section 144 ?'2. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family and the assessment relates to the year 1963-64. The Income-tax Officer served on the assessee a notice under section 139(2) of the Act on May 10, 1963, calling upon it to submit the return for year 1963-64. In response to the said notice, the assessee did not submit any return nor did it apply for extension of time. The Income-tax Officer made an order of assessment on February 29, 1964, under section 144 of the Act by which he determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 52,520. On appeal by the assessee to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, the said inco...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Mysore Vs. S.R. Hulekal and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-1972
Reported in: (1973)1MysLJ53; [1973]31STC513(Kar)
Nesargi, J.1. These appeals are filed by the State against the orders of acquittal passed by the Principal Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sirsi, in C.C. Nos. 685, 687, 689, 75 and 77 of 1970 respectively, in favour of the respondents concerned in the respective cases. We propose to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment as a common question of law is involved in all these appeals. The question that arises is whether a prosecution under section 29(2) of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957 (to be hereinafter referred to as the 'Mysore Act'), is competent in regard to non-payment of tax levied under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (to be hereinafter referred to as the 'Central Act'). 2. These appeals have arisen out of the criminal cases filed under section 29(1) of the Mysore Act on the allegations that the concerned respondents had failed to pay the tax levied against them under the provisions of the Central Act. Assistance of section 9(2) of the Centr...
Tag this Judgment!Mysore State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Albert Dias and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-09-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Kant240; AIR1973Mys240; (1973)1MysLJ273
E.S. Venkataramiah, J.1. The incident with which we are concerend in these appeals took place at about 12-15 P. M. on 2-7-1964 along with the road running between Mangalore and Bhatkal. A Bus belonging to the Mysore State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the corporation) bearing No. MYG 4331 was being driven from Byndoor to Bhatkal. After the said bus left Byndoor at a place near Surgihalli, it was going in a down-gradient after negotiating an Up gradient earlier. Earlier when the bus had reached the top of the gradient, the driver of the bus noticed that a bullock-cart had been left unattended on the left side of the road. When he came near the said cart, he took the bus to the right side of the road and when he did so, the right wheels of the bus got on to the mud portion of the road. Within a few minutes thereafter the right wheels sank in the mud on account of the soil at that place giving way. As a consequence thereof, the bus toppled to the right side. There...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Mysore Vs. M. Srinivasa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-07-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ741; (1973)1MysLJ44
ORDERB. Venkataswami, J.1. These two petitions can be disposed of by a common order. They are by the State and directed against two common Orders, made in two sets of cases on one and 'the same day, viz. 11.1.1972 by the Judicial Magistrate. First Class (2nd Court). Bangalore City. The accused in all these cases were common. The two Orders relate to C.C. Nos. 1946 to 1948/1971 in one case and C.C. Nos. 1949, 1964 and 1965/1971 in the other. In all these cases the charges relate to theft, among other things, and therefore trouble by following the warrant procedure prescribed under the Code.2. The learned Magistrate purporting to exercise jurisdiction under Section 249. Criminal Procedure Code has directed stoppage of proceedings, preserving liberty to the prosecution to revive them on the production of the accused.3. On behalf of the State it is contended by Sri M. Nagappa. the learned Public Prosecutor, that the orders were clearly erroneous and illegal. The contention urged is that th...
Tag this Judgment!Bora Gowda Vs. Rama Naika
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Kant244; AIR1973Mys244
Jagannatha Shetty, J.1. The common petitioner in these petitions is admittedly a tenant of the land bearing S. No: 290 of Koppa Village. Maddur Taluk. The land was annexed to a village office held by the respondents. All village offices in the State of Mysore were abolished by Section 4 of the Mysore Village Offices Abolition Act, 1962, ('the Act'). Section 5 provides for re-grant of the land to the holder of the village office. Section 6 provides for re-grant to authorised holders and Section 7 provides for eviction of an unauthorised holder or re-grant to him in certain circumstances. Section 8 is an important one, in so far as these petitions are concerned. It is set out below:--'8. Application of Tenancy Law.--If any land granted or continued in respect of or annexed to a village office by the State has been lawfully leased and such lease is subsisting on the appointed date, the provisions of the tenancy law for the time being in force in that area in which the land is situate shal...
Tag this Judgment!Patel H.M. Malle Gowda Vs. the State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1047; (1973)1MysLJ42
ORDERB. Venkataswami, J.1. The petitioner is convicted of an offence under Section 294, I.P.C., and has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 30/-in C.C. No. 176 of 1972 on the file of the court of the Munsiff-Magistrate, Arsikere.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: On 8-2-1972, in front of the house of Sekarappa, which is a public place, the petitioner is alleged to have used abusive and obscene words against P.W. 1, a Medical Doctor, by name B. Ramaswamy. The place in question is Jaya-chamarajapura, a suburban village of Arsikere. The Doctor is a Government servant. The language used by the petitioner had dragged the wife of the doctor into the bargain. This conduct of the petitioner was witnessed by several people and it is in evidence that more than one hundred people had seen it. Dr. Ramaswamy then telephoned to the police whereupon P.W. 5, a Police Officer, came to the scene.At that place a written complaint was given by the said Doctor, as also one other complai...
Tag this Judgment!State of Mysore Vs. Ramu B.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1257; (1973)1MysLJ41
ORDERVenkataswami, J.1. This petition by the State is directed against an order made in C. C No. 1683 of 1971 by the judicial Magistrate, First Class (II Court). Bangalore City The order is to the following effect:Accused present. No witnesses are 'kept present despite the directions of the Court...... The Public Prosecutor files a memo seeking summons to C. Ws. 1 and 2 at this stage stating that they are not amenable to police process. His request is not genuine and is rejected.The case is coming up for evidence since long and no witnesses are secured till today.Hence prosecution case is closed for lethargy. For orders, call on 29-1-1972.2. Before the date of the above order the learned Magistrate, on 10-12-1971, after noting that the summonses issued to C.Ws. 8, 9 and 15 had been returned unserved directed the prosecution to take necessary steps for securing the witnesses on the next day.3. It is clear from the record that no attempt has been made by the Court to take such coercive s...
Tag this Judgment!State of Mysore Vs. Venkappasetty and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1568
ORDERB. Venkataswami, J.1. This petition by the State is directed against an Order made by the First Class Magistrate, Hassan, in C.C. No. 912 of 1971 and the Order of affirmance made by the learned Sessions Judge at Hassan, in Cr. R. P. No. 7 of 1971.2. A charge sheet was placed by tha Police of Sakleshpur against the respondents, levelling charges under Sections 302 and 324 read with 34, IPC Apart from the two respondents herein, there was another accused by name Sadhu. In view of the fact that Sadhu had been alleged to be a minor, separate proceedings were instituted against him under Juvenile Offenders Act. We are not concerned with his case for the present.3. The prosecution case is that on 7-5-1971 at about 6.30 p. m. one Alban Lobo was assaulted by the three accused with sticks and stones and was also throttled, as a result of which he died almost immediately.The proceedings were conducted in accordance with the provisions of Section 207-A, Criminal P. C. During the committal st...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›