Karnataka Court June 1978 Judgments
Shampur Lakshmidevamma Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-21-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR526(KAR); [1979]116ITR526(Karn)
Venkataramaiah, J.1. We are concerned in this case with the liability of two of the items of property belonging to the deceased, Shampur Papanna, who died on October 3, 1963. The said two items are, (i) a house bearing No. 8, New High School Road, Visveswarapuram, Bangalore City, and (ii) a house bearing No. 9 situated in the same road. The deceased had made a gift of item No. (i) in favour of his two grand-sons and item No. (ii) in favour of his son under a registered deed of gift dated December 10, 1956. Under the said document, although absolute title was conveyed in favour of the respective donees, there was a reservation made to the effect that the donor (the deceased) and his wife, Smt. Lakshmidevamma, were entitled to reside in the said premises during their lifetime. There was also a recital to the effect that the donees would not be entitled to alienate the properties or part with possession thereof during the lifetime of the donor and his wife. Although the deceased had reser...
Tag this Judgment!Jagadeesan Vs. the State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1546
ORDERM.S. Nesargi, J.1. In this petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C., the order dated 2-1-1978 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, (IInd Court), Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada, in F.I.R. No. 456 of 1977 directing handing over possession of a motor car (Premier Padmini bearing registration No. MEN 399 to respondent-2, is challenged.2. This petition has been filed on 4-1-1978. Sri. Mohandas M. Hegde, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to argue the petition as if it is a criminal revision petition; because, it has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. due to misconception of the effect of Section 397 (2) of the Cr. P.C., but that misconception has been recently removed as the law came to be settled by the Supreme Court in Dec. 1977. The permission is granted and this petition is heard and disposed of in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court.3. The undisputed facts are that respondent-2 Mary George is...
Tag this Judgment!M.K. Ibrahim Shariff Vs. the Sub-inspector of Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1978
Reported in: 1979CriLJ175
ORDERK.S. Puttaswamy, J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged a notice dated 25-1-1978 (date arid year of the notice are not clear received by him on 25-4-1978) issued by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Periyapatna Police Station, Periyapatna.2. The petitioner claims to be the tenant of S. Nos. 107/1, 107/2 and 135 measuring about 5 acres and 23 guntas of land situated at Makodu village, Periyapatna Taluk. It is the case of the petitioner that he is in actual possession and enjoyment of these lands as tenant of one Chandpeer Sab and the application made by his landlord for grant of injunction was refused by this Court in an earlier writ petition filed by his landlord in Writ Petn. No. 2846 of 1977 which has been finally decided on 22-2-1978. It is his case that while he is in possession and no injunctions tion has been granted either by a Land Tribunal or a Civil Court, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Periyapatna Police Station in the i...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Mysore Vs. K.M. Eapen
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-12-1978
Reported in: ILR1979KAR167; [1978]114ITR415(KAR); [1978]114ITR415(Karn); 1978(2)KarLJ180
Srinivasa Iyengar, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, Bench, has referred the following question for a decision of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to the exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of the residential property at 6-A, Rutland Gate, Madras, which was gifted by him to his wife and whose value was included in the net wealth of the assessee under section 4(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ?' 2. The two cases relate to the assessment to wealth-tax for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72. The assessee had gifted the house property to his wife in the year 1962. In terms of section 4(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Wealth-tax Officer included the value of that house in the computation of the net wealth of the assessee in each of the assessment years. He rejected the plea...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka-i
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-12-1978
Reported in: ILR1979KAR170; [1978]114ITR421(KAR); [1978]114ITR421(Karn)
Venkataramaiah, J. 1. This reference is made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' :). The question referred to us reads as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that a sum of Rs. 82,305 representing the interest on securities is taxable in the hands of the assesses bank ?' 2. The Karnataka Bank Ltd, which is carrying on the business of banking, is the assessee in this case. During the accounting year corresponding to the assessment year 1969-70, the assessee had realised certain amount on the sale of its securities. Out of the sale proceeds of the said securities, a sum of Rs. 82,305, was treated by the assessee as interest realised by it in respect of the broken period up to the date of sale, although, in fact, the interest in respect of these securities had been realised by the renders when they became due and payabl...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka-i Vs. Jagadish Jakati and Co.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1978
Reported in: [1979]119ITR19(KAR); [1979]119ITR19(Karn); 1978(2)KarLJ369
Venkataramaiah, J.1. The assessee in these two cases is a firm carrying on business under the name and style of Messrs. Jagadish Jakati & Co., at Belgaum. The assessment years in question are 1969-70 and 1970-71. 2. The firm, Messrs. Jagadish Jakati & Co., Belgaum, was constituted under a partnership deed dated October 12, 1967. The firm applied for registration under s. 184 of the I. T. Act, 1961, before the ITO for the assessment year 1969-70 and the ITO granted registration. For the assessment year 1970-71, the firm applied for a continuance of the registration before the ITO and it was also granted. The CIT being of opinion that the orders granting registration and continuance of registration were erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, took action under s. 263 of the I. T. Act, 1961, and after hearing the assessee, he directed the withdrawal of the registration and re-registration ordered by the ITO and directed him to pass fresh orders of assessment as in the s...
Tag this Judgment!Sha Vajeshankar Vasudev and Co. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Comm ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1978
Reported in: 1979(1)KarLJ64; [1978]42STC353(Kar)
Chandrashekhar, C.J. 1. These appeals are from the common order of Venkataramiah, J., in Writ Petitions Nos. 829 to 831 and 1556 of 1974. The appellants were the petitioners in the writ petitions and for the sake of convenience they will hereinafter be referred to as the assessees. 2. In the writ petitions, the assessees had impugned the orders of rectification made under section 25-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), read with section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The assessing authority had issued to the assessees show cause notices which were served on 31st January, 1970. The orders of rectification impugned in Writ Petitions Nos. 829 to 831 of 1974 were passed on 30th January, 1974, and the order of rectification impugned in Writ Petition No. 1556 of 1974 was passed on 23rd February, 1974. 3. The only ground on which the orders of rectification were assailed was that they were passed beyond 5 years from the respective dates of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Moolannagappa Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Kant15
ORDER1. In accordance with the provisions of the Karnataka Excise Act of 1965 (Karnataka Act No. 21 of 1966) (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1966 Act') and the Karnataka Excise (Lease of the Right of Retail Vend of Liquors) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1969 Rules'), the Excise Commissioner in Karnataka, Bangalore, by his Notification dated 30th March, 1978 (Exhibit A), (published in the Karnataka Gazette Extraordinary dated 12th April, 1978) among others, notified that the lease of the right of retail vend of toddy in the 11 Taluks of Bijapur District for the excise year 1978-79 i.e. from 1-7-1978 to 30-6-1979 (both days inclusive) will be disposed of in public auction by the Deputy Commissioner, Bijapur District, on 28-4-1978. In the public auction held on 28-4-1978, the petitioner qualified to bid offered the highest bid in respect of all the 11 Taluks in all aggregating to Rs. 1,18,000/- per month as against the previous bid amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- per month for th...
Tag this Judgment!Mahalingeshwara Devaru and anr. Vs. Seetharama Bhatta and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Kant213; ILR1978KAR1555; 1979(1)KarLJ9
1. This Second Appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, South Kanara, in R. A. No. 13 of 1969 affirming the decree in O. S. No. 13 of 1967 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Udupi, South Kanara District. The suit was brought by the temple called 'Sree Mahalinge-shwara Devaru' of Havanje village, Udupi Taluk for declaration of title in respect of the suit A and B schedule properties and for recovery of possession on the ground that the defendant who was an Archak of the temple failed to perform 'Archaka service' and has no right to remain in possession. The defendant has not been doing any 'Archaka service' since 1949-50 despite the demand from the temple authorities. The patta of the A Sch. properties stands exclusively in his name and patta of the B Sch. properties stands jointly in the name of the temple and the defendant. The said properties are comprised in Warg Nos. 31 and 36. The case of the plaintiff was that th...
Tag this Judgment!N.N. Ponnappa Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1551
ORDERM.S. Nesargi, J.1. This petition, filed under S 482 of the Cr. P.C., is directed against the order dated 14-10-1977 passed by the Additional Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Madikeri, in Criminal Case No. 2992 of 1977 allowing the request of complainant N. M. Chatticha respondent : 2, and issuing process against the petitioner directing that he should be the 3rd accused in the said case. .2. The few facts which are necessary may be narrated as follows:In regard to an incident that had happened at about 7-00 a.m. on 16-7-1977, the complainant had lodged information in the Napoklu Police Station. A case under Section 324 read with Section 34, I.P.C. was registered and investigated. The Napoklu police filed a charge-sheet as against two accused only. The petitioner was not one of them. The magistrate took cognizance of the offence and then issued process against the said two accused. Those two accused appeared before the Magistrate in response to the process. At that sta...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »