Karnataka Court July 1974 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.
Padmashri Humayun Mirza Vs. the Station Director, All India Radio, No. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-18-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Kant124; ILR1974KAR1467; 1975(1)KarLJ14
Nesargi, J. 1. This appeal is under Section 11 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act 1952. The appellant was the claimant before the Arbitrator. The appellant's property known as 'Cubbon House' in Gibbon Road, Bangalore, was requisitioned by the Central Government in order to house the All India Radio Station. An amount of Rs. 500/- per month was offered as compensation to the appellant, but the appellant did not agree that it was the proper compensation. He contended that he was to receive Rs. 600/- per month as compensation. In view of this dispute an Arbitrator was appointed as per the provisions of Section 8 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). When the matter was taken up by the Arbitrator, the claimant gave his assessment of compensation at Rs. 600/- per month from 8-7-1954 to 31-3-1961, at Rs. 1,500/- per month from 1-4-1961 to 1-4-1965 and at Rs. 2,500/- per month from 1-4-1965 t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sundaram and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-17-1974
Reported in: ILR1974KAR1459
Venkataswami, J.1. This appeal by the Commissioner of Income-tax has come up before us on a reference by a learned single judge of this court and is directed against a judgment of the Civil Judge, Civil Station, Bangalore, in R. A. No. 80/1970. That appeal had been preferred by the plaintiff-1st respondent against the judgment and decree of the principal munsiff, civil station, Bangalore, in O.S. No. 326 of 1968.2. The facts relevant may be set out at some length and are as follows:The plaintiff-1st respondent, Sundaram, and two other persons by name Balasubramaniam and Jayalakshmi constituted a partnership firm. The said firm having been dissolved, they were assessed to tax under the Indian Income-tax Act as an unregistered firm for the assessment year 1963-64. On such assessment, presumably at the instance of the partners, the total tax liability was apportioned between them for the purpose of convenience. The 1st respondent (plaintiff) and Jayalakshmi paid up the portions of the tax...
K. Byrappa Vs. Henjari Gowda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-17-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Kant51; ILR1974KAR1385; 1974(2)KarLJ427
1. This is the decree-holder's second appeal against the order made by the Additional Civil Judge, Tumkur, in Execution Appeal No. 10 of 1973 reversing the order made by the Munsiffat Madhugiri in Execution Case No. 457 of 1972.2. The appellant filed Original Suit No. 603 of 1964 for recovery of certain amount from the respondent. The suit was decreed on 22-1-1966 and the respondent was directed to pay the decretal amount in four annual equal instalments. That decree was affirmed on appeal by the Civil Judge, Tumkur. The respondent challenged the said decree in Regular Second Appeal No. 362 of 1968 in this Court. This Court dismissed the said appeal on the 9th of February, 1972. Neither the first appellate court nor this Court modified the direction of the Court of first instance regarding payment of the decretal amount in four annual equal instalments.3. The decree-holder filed execution Case No. 457 of 1972 for realising the decretal amount in the Court of the Munsiff, Madhugiri, on ...
Arctic Ice Company Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1974
Reported in: [1975]36STC91(Kar)
ORDERGovinda Bhat, C.J.1. These are three revision petitions preferred by a common assessee under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The petitioners are dealers registered under the Act. For part of the assessment year 1968-69 and for the whole of the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71, three assessment orders were passed by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Mangalore, on 23rd December, 1971. Copies of the assessment orders, however, were not served on the petitioners. Demand notices were served on 1st January, 1972. The petitioners applied for certified copies of the assessment orders on 11th January, 1972. They were asked to appear and receive the certified copies on 14th January, 1972. But the petitioners did not attend office to take delivery on 14th January, 1972. The copies were delivered to them on 1st February, 1972. The petitioners preferred three appeals before the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes on 28th February, 1972. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the...
Manusukhlal A. Shah Vs. the State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-16-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC465(Kar)
ORDERGovinda Bhat, C.J.1. These are two connected revision petitions preferred under section 13(4) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, hereinafter called 'the Act'. The petitions are directed against the common order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bangalore City, dated 27th September, 1973, in C. Misc. Nos. 46 and 47 of 1973, by which the learned Magistrate, in proceedings for recovery of arrears of sales tax under section 13(3)(b) of the Act, overruled the contention of the dealer, who is the petitioner in these revision petitions, on the ground that he has no jurisdiction to go into the question whether there was proper service of the notices of demand. 2. The matters arise in this way. The petitioner, one Manusukhlal A. Shah is a dealer assessed under the Act for the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71. Two assessment orders were passed by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, IV Circle, Bangalore, on 5th September, 1972, and 27th September, 1972, respectively. T...
M. Gangappa Vs. the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore and o ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-12-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Kant143; 1974(2)KarLJ467
ORDER1. The petitioner is a transport contractor. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, he challenges the legality of the order of the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal by which the permit of the petitioner on the interstate route from T. B. Dam to Ananthapur has been set aside.2. The Government of Karnataka notified a draft scheme under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, hereinafter called 'the Act'. The said scheme which is popularly known as 'the Bellary Scheme' was approved providing for the operation of trunk routes by the State Transport undertaking (which I shall call it as the 'Corporation'). The scheme which was approved on 18-1-1964, was brought into force on 1-7-1965. Clause (d) of the Schedule attached to the said scheme provides:'The State Transport undertaking will operate services at all the routes to the complete exclusion of other persons except in regard to the portions of inter-district routes lying outside the limits of Bellary District;...
The Superintendent of Police, Dharwar and anr. Vs. Nikhil Bindurao Gal ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-11-1974
Reported in: ILR1975KAR980; 1974(2)KarLJ495
Venkataswami, J. 1. This is an appeal by the Superintendent of Police, Dharwar, and the Karnatak Government Insurance Department, under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. They are aggrieved by the award of compensation for injuries received by the claimant, who is a school going boy of eight years, in Mis. (M. V. C.) Case No. 15 of 1971 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Dharwar (District Judge).2. The vehicle involved is a prison van in charge of the Police, used for the conveyance of the under trial prisoners between the jail and the Court, in addition to its use by the police personnel. This vehicle had been registered in the name of the Superintendent of Police of the District concerned. The boy was a student attending a school near the, cotton market of Hubli. It would appear that at the spot there were schools on either side of the road, and as result of their situation, two signboards had been put up within a reasonable distance of the schools, procl...
Acchanaik Vs. the State of Mysore and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-10-1974
Reported in: ILR1974KAR1361; 1974(2)KarLJ453
ORDER1. In this petition under Article 226, the validity of the notification dated 26th April, 1973 issued by the State Government under Section 4 read with Sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter called 'the Act', falls for decision.2. By the said notification, Survey No. 9/7 belonging to the petitioner has been acquired for a public purpose to wit for village extension of I. D. Halli Village. It is stated therein that in view of the urgency of the case, the provisions of Section 5-A of the Act shall not apply to the acquisition of the land. It is the contention of the petitioner that the purpose for which his land was sought to be acquired was not so urgent as to dispense with the enquiry under Section 5-A and the decision of the Government that it was an urgent matter was not based on relevant facts. The said notification is sought to be defended on behalf of the State by contending that this Court cannot go behind the notification as the opinion...
Pachakhan Vs. H.D. Gopalakrishna Rao and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-10-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Kant179; ILR1975KAR25; 1975(1)KarLJ105
1. The appellant is defendant 4. Respondents 1 and 2 are plaintiffs. Respondent 3 is the first defendant, since deceased represented by his legal representatives. Respondents 4, 5 and 8 are respectively defendants 2, 3 and 5. The suit out of which this second appeal arises was filed in the year 1952 for redemption of Item 1 of the plaint schedule property which is Survey No. 45 of Kambalalu village, Tumkur taluk. It is unfortunate that even after all these years the litigation has not come to an end. According to the case of the plaintiff, the suit property was granted to one Tyagaraj and another land Survey No. 36 of the same village was granted to the father of the fourth defendant, both the grants being made by the Government. Under Ex. P-5 dated 24-4-1931 Tyagaraj sold Survey No. 45 to one Viswanath Mudaliar, who in turn sold it to Monterio under Ex. P-4 dated 4-1-1940. Monterio sold it to second defendant under Ex. P-3 dated 30-9-1946 and the second defendant sold it to the plaint...
H.V. Srinivasa Murthy Vs. the Regional Transportt Authority and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-09-1974
Reported in: ILR1974KAR1357; 1974(2)KarLJ398
ORDER1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, is directed against the order of the Karnataka State Transportr -- Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore by which it has set aside the permit of the petitioner on route Masur to Shimoga and affirmed the grant of permit of respondent 3 on route Shimoga to Masur.2. The petitioner and respondent 3 are stage carriage operators. Before the Regional Transport Authority Shimoga, the petitioner applied for a permit from Masur to Shimoga. Respondent 3 applied for a permit from Shimoga to Masur. The total distance between Shimoga to Masur or vice-versa is 42 miles, out of which an extent of 3 miles 6 furlongs lies within the jurisdiction of the Regional Transport Authority, Dharwar. The Regional Transport Authority, Shimoga, after considering the said applications, granted permits to both, as prayed for by them.3. Several rival operators who objected to the grant of those permits, appealed to the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal. T...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »