Karnataka Court January 1978 Judgments
Doddappa and ors. Vs. Basavanneppa Basappa Chinniwalar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-31-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Kant143; 1978(1)KarLJ414
ORDER1. This Revision Petition is instituted by the tenants against the judgment and order dated 10-6-1975, passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Belgaum, in H. R. C. Appeal No. 60 of 1973 on his file, allowing the petition of the landlord for eviction of the tenants from the suit promises, on reversing the order dated 31-3-1973, passed by the Munsiff, Bailhongal, in H. R. C. No. 2 of 1971 on his file.2. The landlord instituted action for eviction of the tenants from the suit premises under Clause (h) of the proviso to Section 21 (1) of the Kamataka Rent Control Act, 1961, before the Munsiff, Bailhongal, claiming possession from the tenants for the purpose of starting a Bakery. He required the suit premises bona fide and reasonably for his personal occupation.3. The tenants resisted the petition. They contended that the petition was not maintainable as the landlord had not validly terminated the tenancy. They also contended that the requirement of the landlord was not bona fi...
Tag this Judgment!Ankaputtaswamy and ors. Vs. Papegowda and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1233
N.D. Venkatesh, J.1. Since an important question of law is involved in these petitions, the same have been referred to the Division Bench by Nesargi, J. The question of law involved is whether the impugned orders are 'interlocutory orders' as contemplated under Section 397 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) and therefore the revisions in question are barred?2. The facts that gave rise to these petitions briefly stated are these:These petitions have been filed under Section 397 (1) of the Code.Cr. R.P. No. 205 of 1975 has been filed by the respondents in Cr. Mis. No. 24 of 1974-75 on the file of the Sr. Divisional Magistrate, Pandavapura, against the order of that Court made under Section 112 of the Code; Cr. R.P. 296 of 1975 has been filed by some of the respondents in No. CR/MAG/40/74-75 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Kopala, Raichur District, against the order of that Court taking steps against them under Section 107 of the...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Karnataka Vs. R.M.K. Sivasubramanya Om
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-25-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ853
N.D. Venkatesh, J.1. The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of the Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City, in C. C. No. 2260 of 1974. The respondent was the accused in that case. He was prosecuted by the Drug Inspector, Bangalore, for offences Under Sections 3(b) and 3(a) read with Section 7(o) of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 154 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the allegation that tie had caused publication of an advertisement in respect of certain drugs stating that the same would increase sexual pleasure and cure Tuberculosis.2. In support of its case the prosecution has examined four witnesses including the Drug Inspector (P.W. 1). The accused denied the accusation made against him. Though he has admitted of the seizure of certain drugs from his hotel room, he denied having got Ex. P-l (a) published in the newspaper.3. The accused hails from a place called Palani in Tamil Nadu. He is a native Vaidya and will b...
Tag this Judgment!Sangappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-24-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1367
ORDERN.R. Kudoor, J.1. This petition is one under Section 439 of the Cr. P.C., 1973 (Act 2 of 1974) (hereinafter referred to as the 'new Code') by the petitioner Sangappa who is A-l in Sessions Case No. 46 of 1977 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Bidar, for admitting him to bail during the pendency of the Sessions trial.2. The few facts relevant for the disposal of this petition may be stated as under:3. Deceased Baburao is the younger brother of the petitioner. They belong to Jaknal village of Aurad Taluk in Bidar District. There was enmity between the petitioner and the deceased on account of the partition of their family properties. On 16-6-1977 between 4 and 5 p.m., the petitioner and 8 others formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object and preplanned intention to commit the murder of Baburao, attacked him in the nala of Jaknal village with sickles, axes and sticks and inflicted fatal injuries. The occurrence in question is said to have been witnessed by Jo...
Tag this Judgment!Motor Industries Co. Ltd. Vs. D. Adinarayanappa and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-23-1978
Reported in: [1978(36)FLR430]; ILR1978KAR696; 1978(1)KarLJ245; (1978)ILLJ443Kant
ORDERPer Rama Jois, J.1. Whether a domestic enquiry held by the management which is valid in all respects is invalid on the ground that before holding the enquiry an opportunity of answering the charges should be given to the delinquent-employee is the question that arises for consideration in this case. 2. The petitioner is the Motor Industries Co. Ltd., an industrial establishment within the meaning of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Management'). The 1st respondent was an employee of the petitioner-management. A charge memo dated 10-5-1974 was served on the petitioner. In the said charge memo certain alleged acts of the 1st respondent were set out and it was stated that if those charges are proved the same amounts to wilful insubordination and disobedience of lawful and reasonable orders of superiors and also absence without permission from the appointed place of work and acts subversive of discipline and neglect of work. It was further...
Tag this Judgment!Tammanna Parisa Gundale Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Kant199
ORDER1. The petitioner who originally entered as a sub-tenant of agricultural lands, and who claimed occupancy rights under Section 48-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act (briefly 'the Act') on the ground that he had become a lawful tenant of the land-owner, but whose claim has been rejected by the Land Tribunal, has presented this writ petition praying for quashing the order of the Land Tribunal.2. The undisputed facts of the case are these: One Smt. Subhadrabai, mother of respondent 2 was the owner of 29 acres and 5 guntas of land in Sy. No. 474 of Ainapur village in Athani Taluk in. Belgaum District, The said lands were leased in favour of Govardhan Dairy Farm Ltd., Poona in the year 1948-49. Govardhan Dairy Farm in turn sub-let the lands in favour of the petitioner. Section 27 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Act') provides that sub-letting of lands by a tenant is invalid and Section 14 of that Act provides the various g...
Tag this Judgment!S.Y. Modagekar and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-18-1978
Reported in: 1978(1)KarLJ161; [1978]41STC278(Kar)
Rama Jois, J. 1. The legality of search and seizure of certain account books made by the Commercial Tax Officer (Intelligence), Belgaum the respondent in the petition, is challenged in this writ petition by a registered dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. The impugned order made by the respondent being relevant is extracted below : 'Order of Seizure U/s. 28(A)(3) of the K.S.T. Act, 1957 : I visited the business premises of M/s. SY. Modagekar and Sons, Ganeshwar Galli, Shahapur, Belgaum, on 10-3-1976 at about 6-30 P.M. and conducted the inspection along with C.T.P. (Enf) III, N.Z., Belgaum and the C.T.I's of the Office. At the time of my inspection Shri Shasikant Shamrao Modagekar, the Partner was present and he produced the current books of account and sale bills for inspection. On examination it was found that the assessee had written the day book upto 5-3-1976 on which the closing balance was not struck and I have signed...
Tag this Judgment!S.Y. Modagekar and Sons Vs. Commercial Tax Officer (int.), Northern Zo ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-18-1978
Reported in: [1978]41STC298(Kar)
ORDERRama Jois, J. 1. The legality of search and seizure of certain account books made by the Commercial Tax Officer (intelligence), Belgaum - the respondent in the petition - is challenged in this writ petition by a registered partnership firm being a registered dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. The impugned order made by the respondent being relevant is extracted below : 'Order of seizure under section 28(3) of the K.S.T. Act, 1957 : I visited the business premises of M/s. S. Y. Modagekar & Sons, Ganeshwar Galli, Shahapur, Belgaum, on 10th March, 1976, at about 6-30 P.M. and conducted the inspection along with C.T.O. (Enf.) III, N.Z., Belgaum, and the C.T.Is. of the officer. At the time of my inspection shri Shasikant Shamrao Modagekar, the partner, was present and he produced the current books of account and sale bills for inspection. On examination it was found that the assessee had written the day-book up to 5th Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Y. Shantha Vs. the Selection Committee for Post Graduate Degree and Di ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-18-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Kant66
ORDER1. Dr. Y. Shanta, petitioner before me having completed M.B.B.S. and Senior Horsemanship was an applicant for selection to a Post Graduate Degree in Paediatrics, Micro Biology and five other subjects, the selection of which is regulated by the Karnataka Medical Colleges (Selection for Post Graduate Course) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'The 1977 Rules'). She has been selected for a Post Graduate Course in Micro Biology by the Selection Committee. But, her case is that she should have been selected to Post Graduate Course in Paediatrics having regard to her merit in preference to respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 who are less meritorious than herself. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, she has challenged her non-selection to the subject of Paediatrics and the selection of respondents Nos. 2 to 4 as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In the Statement of Objections filed, respondent No. 1 has not denied the assertion of the petitioner that she ...
Tag this Judgment!S.V. Sreekanthayya Vs. Lakshmi Hardware Stores and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-18-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Kant100
ORDER1. This is a landlord's revision petition against the order dated 25-6-1977 passed by the III Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore City, in H.R. C. No. 1207 of 1975 on his file holding that the petition of the landlord for eviction of tenants represented by the receiver was not maintainable.2. The landlord instituted a petition for eviction of the tenants under Clause (h) of the proviso to Section 21(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961. In the litigation with regard to the partnership dissolution, a receiver was appointed to the properties of the partnership firm which was running in the said premises, by the High Court of Bombay. Hence, the receiver was also made a party to the suit in addition to the partners and the firm.3. A preliminary objection was raised during the hearing of the petition. It was contended that the petition was not maintainable on two grounds, viz., that the leave of the High Court of Bombay was not obtained to sue against the receiver and secondly Sect...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »