Karnataka Court June 1979 Judgments
Socio Literati Advancement Society, Bangalore Vs. State of Karnataka a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-12-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Kant217; 1979(2)KarLJ224
ORDER1. The petitioner is a society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. It is alleged that it was founded by people of Kerala who speak Malayalam as their mother-tongue and that all its members and office-bearers on the Board of Management of the Society belong to this linguistic group which constitutes a linguistic group which constitutes a linguistic minority in the City of Bangalore particularly, and generally in the rest of the State of Karnataka. The Society, according to the assertion made was founded in the month of March, 1978, with the sole object of serving the interest of the linguistic group, the main object being to promote the educational, cultural and other interests of the aforesaid group residing in the State of Karnataka, particularly in the City of Bangalore. In support of this assertion, the petitioner-society has produced the memorandum of association and bye-laws which has been certified by the Registrar of Societies in Karnataka on 17...
Tag this Judgment!Gurupadappa Vs. Deputy Registrar of Co-op. Societies and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-11-1979
Reported in: 1979(2)KarLJ314; (1980)ILLJ95Kant
ORDER1. In this writ petition, notice was issued regarding issue of rule. The respondents though served, have remained unrepresented. The petition has come up in 'B' Group for preliminary hearing. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner was heard. The writ petitioner is an employee of the 3rd respondent-Bellary Co-operative City Bank Limited, a Co-operative Society duly incorporated under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act.) He entered the services of the said society as a bill collector in the year 1961. By dint of hard work, he was promoted to the post of clerk in the year 1966. He was also later on deputed to undergo Co-operative Training at the cost of the 3rd respondent-Society. He passed the said course in II class. On 19th March, 1976 the Society by its order promoted the petitioner as an accountant of the Bank in the pay scale of Rs. 150-8-190-EB-10-320 with admissible dearness allowance and other allowances, adding two additional inc...
Tag this Judgment!Jammada Aivappa Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-11-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Kant22
ORDER1. In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner who is the owner of the lands bearing S Nos. 71/5, 71/4 and 73/7 of Kaikere village, Virajpet Taluk, has challenged the validity of the notifications issued under Ss. 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act 1 of 1894), (as amended by Karnataka Act 17 of 1961) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. By the preliminary notification dated 6-8-1975, the lands bearing S. Nos. 71/1, 71/3, 73/1 and 73/6 belong- to the petitioner were, proposed to be acquired for the purpose of opening a road from Gonikoppal Virajpet Main Road deviating near Cauvery College and leading to Vokkaligar Gadde. The petitioner has filed his objections and after enquiring into the objections, and after hearing the petitioner, the Asstt. Commissioner, Mercara Sub-Division made a report under S. 5-A of the Act. Thereafter the final notification dated Nil, under S. 6 of the Act came to be published in' the Official Gazette co...
Tag this Judgment!H.Y. Jadhav Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-1979
Reported in: ILR1979KAR1673; [1981]48STC496(Kar)
Rama Jois, J.1. In these four connected sales tax revision petitions the following question of law has been referred for the opinion of the Full Bench : 'Where a contract under which an assessee agrees to supply jelly (ballast) to the purchaser with the condition that the jelly (ballast) would be stacked in a particular manner before delivering would amount to a contract for work or a composite contract for sale of goods and for work.' 2. The brief facts of these cases, which have given rise to the above question, are as follows : (i) The petitioner, who is common in all these petitions, is an assessee under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Under contracts entered into between him and the railway department, he supplied ballast (which is called 'jelly' in Kannada) which is used by the railway department as bed or substratum for the railway track or, in other words, for the ballasting of the railway track. According to the terms...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›