Karnataka Court January 1976 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.
Hiranyakeshi Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-1976
Reported in: ILR1976KAR1140; [1977]107ITR712(KAR); [1977]107ITR712(Karn)
1. These are five revision petitions arising under the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, hereinafter called 'the Act', and they relate to the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69. The assessee is Hiranyakeshi Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit, which is a society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. The accounting years of the assessee is a co-operative sugar factory carrying on the business of manufacture of sugar for which purpose it purchases sugarcane from growers. The assessee acquired through the State Government 147 acres 30 guntas of land in Sankeshwar in Belgaum District, pursuant to the Government notification dated May 25, 1959. The land was khane Niyamit. The assessee obtained an order from the Deputy Commissioner allowing conversion of the said land for non-agricultural purposes. The relevant order of the Deputy Commissioner, Belgaum, is dated December 30, 1961. The said order, inter alia, provided that the assessee shall pa...
Raghavendra Swamy Mutt Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-1976
Reported in: ILR1976KAR299; 1976(1)KarLJ82
ORDER1. The petitioner is a religious institution. It has questioned the validity of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1973 (Act 1 of 1974) by which the State Legislature amended many of the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (Act 10 of 1962). The constitutional validity of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, was upheld by the Supreme Court in Golaknath v. State of Punjab : [1967]2SCR762 . In Bhaskar Krishnaji v. State of Karnataka : AIR1975Kant55 I have upheld the validity of the Karnataka Act 1 of 1974 being of the opinion that it is protected by Article 31A of the Constitution. The validity of Sections 48 and 48A relating to the constitution of the Tribunals and the procedure to be followed before the Tribunals under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act has been specifically upheld in Khatija Bi v. State of Karnataka (ILR (1975) Kant 1481).2. It is however contended by Sri. T. Krishna Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the Amending Act (Act 1 of 1974...
H.K. Krishnamurthy Vs. the Regional Transport Authority, Mysore and or ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-02-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Kant190; ILR1976KAR758; 1976(1)KarLJ198
ORDER1. On 24th June 1974, the Regional Transport Authority (R. T. A.) issued a notification under Section 57 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, (shortly called 'the Act') inviting applications for the grant of stage carriage permits on the route 'Mysore to Koudelhalli and back'. The Gazette notification shows that it was signed by the in-charge Secretary of the R. T. A. In response to the said notification, respondents 2 to 18 submitted their applications. The petitioner was one among the objectors opposing the grant of the proposed permits. On 11th June 1975, the applications came up for consideration before the R. T. A. The petitioner raised a preliminary objection that the notification issued under Section 57 (2) was invalid since it was issued by the in-charge Secretary who was incompetent to perform the statutory functions under the Act. That objection was based on the well known principle that a person in-charge of a statutory office can only perform the day to day routine works and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›