Karnataka Court December 1975 Judgments
Khadi and Village Industries Commission, Bombay Vs. N.S. Pai
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Kant85; ILR1976KAR310
Venkatachaliah, J.1. The central question that arises for determination in this appeal of the Khadi and Village Industries Commission, a body corporate established by the Khadi and Village Industries Commission Act, 1956 (61 of 1956), which we shall hereinafter call the Act, preferred against the decree of dismissal dated 6-9-1974 in 0. S. No. 48 of 1972 on the file of the Civil Judge at Hubli, is whether the jurisdiction of Civil Courts is barred by virtue and clear implications of the provisions of Section 19-B of the Act. The Court below holds that it is.2. Appellant instituted the above suit against respondent for the recovery of sum of Rs. 26,406.75. The suit was resisted on the ground, amongst others, that the dispute in the suit was triable exclusively by the Tribunal contemplated under Section 19-B of the Act and that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to take cognisance of and entertain the suit. Having regard to the scope of this appeal which arises out of and is directed ag...
Tag this Judgment!K. Keshavamurthy Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-12-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ761
ORDERM.S. Nesargi, J.1. These petitions can be conveniently disposed of together as they arise out of a common order dated 9-5-1975 passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Holenarasipur, in Criminal Cases Nos. 215 to 221 of 1974, holding that the provisions prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Old Code') and not the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'New Code') would be applicable and therefore the prosecution had made out a prima facie case of an offence punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner.2. The facts giving rise to these petitions may be narrated as follows:On 17-4-1973 one Raghunathaiah filed a private complaint before the Magistrate alleging that the petitioner had committed offences punishable under Sections 408 and 420 of the Penal Code. On receipt of the complaint, the then Magistrate passed an order as follows:Complaint pres...
Tag this Judgment!The Links, Advertisers and Business Promoters, a Registered Firm Repre ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-03-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Kar)141; ILR1976KAR441; 1976(1)KarLJ131
Venkataswami, J.1. This appeal is by the writ petitioner in W.P. No. 879 of 1973 and directed against an order made therein by Jagannatha Shetty, J. dismissing the petition. 2. The material facts are few and briefly as follows :- The appellant is a firm carrying on a business of advertising commercial goods and various other items. One of the modes adopted for the purpose of such business is to put up hoardings on properties taken on lease or license from their owners. Thus it came to put up hoardings on railway lands in the compound of the railway station at Bangalore. Such hoardings had been put up in such a way that the advertisements displayed thereon were in the plain view of the members of the public using the street and surrounding localities. The Municipal Corporation of the City of Bangalore ('Corporation for short) demanded of the appellant to pay the necessary advertisement tax in accordance with the relevant provisions of the City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation Act ('Ac...
Tag this Judgment!K.G. Virupaxayya Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-03-1975
Reported in: ILR1976KAR650; 1976(1)KarLJ141
ORDER1. The petitioner in this writ petition has questioned the orders passed by the Land Tribunal, Shikaripur, on 24-10-1975, holding, that the lands bearing survey Nos. 200, 202, 203, 252, 211 and 1 of Issur village, Shikaripur Taluk, stand resumed to the Government, after rejecting the applications made by three persons who claimed that they should be registered as occupants of the lands in question. The Land Tribunal rejected the applications of the three persons referred to above on the ground that they had not established that they were the tenants on the relevant date and that the petitioner who owned lands in excess of the ceiling imposed by law had put forward them as his tenants with a view to avoid the taking over of the lands in excess of the ceiling limit. While doing so it held that the lands in question stood resumed to the State Government.2. While the Tribunal was right in rejecting the application made by the three persons referred to above, it could not have ordered ...
Tag this Judgment!Madappa and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-03-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Kant51; ILR1976KAR652; 1976(1)KarLJ138
ORDER1. The petitioners in these writ petitions have challenged the validity of the proceedings initiated under sub-section (1) of S. 3 of the Karnataka Acquisition of Land for Grant of House Sites Act, 1972 (Karnataka Act No. 18 of 1973) (herein after referred to as the 'Act') to acquire a piece of land in Belur village, of Mandya Taluk bearing Survey No. 5 and measuring two acres.2. The proceedings were initiated by the publication of a notification under subsection (1) of S. 3 of the Act by the State Government in the Karnataka Gazette Extraordinary, dated July 24th, 1974. Under that notification the Government proposed to acquire an extent of 3 acres and 20 guntas of land in the said Survey number. After the publication of the said notification the Assistant Commissioner issued notices under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act to the Petitioners, who were found to be the owners of the land, to show cause within 30 days from the date of service of the notice, why the land should...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›