Karnataka Court January 1980 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.
Neminath Brothers Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer (intelligence) Iv, No ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-30-1980
Reported in: 1980(2)KarLJ21; [1980]45STC490(Kar)
ORDERJagannatha Shetty, J.1. This petition under article 226 of the Constitution is by a registered firm whose business premises were searched by the respondent and in the course of which some books of account, documents and other papers were seized. The validity of the search and seizure has been called into question. 2. The petitioner-firm is a registered dealer under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, and also under the Central Sales Tax Act. On 2nd February, 1978, at about 4.00 P.M., the respondent along with several other officers raided the premises of the petitioner. The search was authorised by a warrant issued by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, III Court, Belgaum, who has stated in his order that he has reason to believe that the petitioner was in possession of incriminating documents or accounts and they could not be secured by summons or requisitions. 3. The respondent was an officer of the Intelligence Wing but not a jurisdictional assessing authority of the petitione...
Ninge Gowda Vs. Jayamma and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-29-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Kant166; ILR1980KAR589; 1980(2)KarLJ25
ORDER1. One Rame Gowda got by a partition an extent of land measuring 30 1/2 giants in Survey No. I61/1A of Chinakurali village Pandavapura Taluk. Out of that, he sold 18 giants of land to the petitioner Ninge Gowda by a registered sale deed dated- 16th Aug., 1975. Thereupon the wife and three children of Rame Gowda presented a petition before the Deputy Commissioner, Mandya under S. 39 of the Karnataka Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1966 ('the Act'). Without even a notice to the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner held that the sale was void because the land sold was a fragment as defined under the said Act. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the order of the Deputy Commissioner before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal no doubt, held that the Deputy Commissioner ought not to have made the order without hearing the petitioner. Yet it confirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner on the sole ground that there was no valid defence for t...
K. Seetharama Rao Vs. Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Davanagere
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-1980
Reported in: [1986]62STC348(Kar)
Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner who is the proprietor of a restaurant runs in the name and style of 'Shri Rama Restaurant', Regulated Market Committee Yard, Davanagere, has questioned the legality of assessing his turnover in the restaurant business under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the ground that what is rendered in the course of his business to his customers is service to the customers and that there is no sale of food articles. 2. In the case of Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi : [1979]1SCR557 , the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the service of meals to casual visitors in a restaurant located in a hotel in which lodging and meals are provided on 'inclusive terms' to residents is not taxable as a sale under the Act. In further held that the position is the same even in respect of the charge imposed for the meal as a whole or according to dishes separately ordered. The deci...
V. Durgappa Vs. the Chief Engineer and Disciplinary Authority, Karnata ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Kant167
ORDER1. Petitioner Durgappa, who is an employee of the Karnataka Electricity Board, was working as Supervisor. However, disciplinary action came to be taken against him and after due enquiry the Disciplinary Authority passed an order whereby be was demoted to the post of operator in the services of the Board and also he was inflicted with the penalty of not being considered for promotion for a further period of 3 years. That order is produced at Exhibit 'A' to the petition.2. In accordance with the relevant rules applicable to his service conditions under the Board he preferred an appeal on 25-8-1978 against the order at Exhibit 'A', dated 12-1-1978. While that appeal was kept in abeyance be made a representation dated 3-10-1978 explaining the delay in filing the appeal beyond a period of 30 days prescribed for lodging such appeals. The appellate authority, viz., the Chairman, Karnataka Electricity Board, rejected the appeal on the sole ground that the appeal was barred by time and the...
Gangadhar Bhat Vs. Srikant and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-24-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Kant35; ILR1980KAR792; 1980(1)KarLJ416
1. This Miscellaneous Second Appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 (u) of the C. P. C. 1908, ('the Code') is directed against the order dated August 17, 1978 of the Court of Civil Judge at Gulbarga ('the Appellate Court') in an appeal, setting aside an ex parte decree dated February 24, 1978 of the court of Munsiff, Gulbarga ('the trial Court') in a suit and remitting the suit to the trial Court for- further trial and disposal.2. The trial Court had set down the suit, out of which the present appeal arises, for trial on August 22, 1978. On that day, it received a telegram from counsel for defendants, who was away from town. By that telegram, the counsel had applied for adjournment of the trial' on the ground that he was ill. The trial Court without granting the adjournment proceeded with the trial of the suit in the absence of the defendants' counsel and the defendants and passed an ex parte decree.3. The defendants preferred an appeal against the ex parte decree. The appellate Court heard the...
Patil Shivayya Vs. Kavishetti Shankarappa Sugurappa and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-22-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Kant79; ILR1980KAR295; 1980(1)KarLJ71
ORDER1. The petitioner has Filled I.A. IV; it purports to be an application under S. 151 of the Civil P. C. He seeks permission to get on record the marked electoral rolls maintained by the Polling Officers of the Polling Booths situated at Ilkal town through his witness P. W. 14, Sri Thamanna Gowda Thammanna Gowda Patil. This witness who is being examined by the petitioner is the 4th respondent in the election petition. He was the Returning Officer of the constituency at the time of the election in question.2. The facts leading to the filing of this I.A. IV may briefly be stated:The petitioner has called in, question the election of the first respondent to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly from the Hunugund. Assembly Constituency No. 216 in the General Elections held in the month of Feb. 1978 1978. He is challenging the election on four grounds, namely - . (I) That the first respondent had committed corrupt practices by unduly influencing the voters and interfering with the free exer...
B. Krishna Bhat Vs. the Superintendent of Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Kant81
ORDER1. All these cases which are closely interlinked, heard together, can be conveniently disposed of by a common order and, therefore, I propose to dispose of them by a common order.2. Some time in 1969, an Association called as Karnataka Young Writers and Artist's Association (hereinafter referred to as 'the Association' registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act of 1960 (Karnataka, Act No. 11 of 1960) and a Co-operative Society called as the Writers' and Artists' House Building Co-operative Society Limited (here, after referred to as 'the Society) registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act of 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') were formed, inter alia ,with the object of acquiring lands, forming sites and distributing the sites to the members of the Society. The Society has on its rolls about 2,000 members, one of them being one Sri S.Sitaram is respondent No. 3 in Writ Petition No. 1781 of 1979. Sriyuths: B....
Puttegowda Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-10-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Kant102; ILR1980KAR160; 1980(1)KarLJ281
Bopanna, J. 1. This is a tenant's appeal from the order of Swami allowing the writ petition filed by the landlords who are respondents 3 and 4 herein and quashing the order of the Land Tribunal, Hunsur, which had granted him occupancy rights in 2 acres of wet land in Survey No. 298, Hussainpura Nala village, Hunsur Taluk.2. The relevant facts briefly stated are these: The appellant was the tenant of the land aforesaid since the time of the landlord's father, Siddappa. After the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'), came into force, he filed an application under Section. 48A of the Act judgment of K. A. Swami, reported in : AIR1979Kant211 . Act for grant of occupancy rights in that land. In his application (produced as Exhibit-C with the writ petition), he had claimed tenancy of that land over a period of 25 years. In the statement of objections before the Land Tribunal, respondents 3 and 4 contended, inter alia, that the appellant was not the tenant of that land in vi...
A. Prabhakara Reddy Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-07-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Kant207; 1980(1)KarLJ456
ORDER1. This petition coming up for further order, by consent of counsel for petitioner and Respondents 1and 2, is taken up for final hearing and disposed of by the following order. 2. The Court felt that Respondents 3 and 4 were not necessary parties while issuing the rule. Therefore, no notice had gone to them. 3. In this Writ Petition the petitioner has prayed for a Writ of Mandamus from this Court to Respondents 1 and 2 to transfer him to the Bangalore Medical College (Government College) affiliated to the Bangalore University from the Government Medical College, Hubli, where he is now prosecuting his studies in M. B. B. S. Course consequent upon his selection and allotment to the Karnataka Medical College, Hubli (affiliated to the Karnataka University). 4. The petitioner has founded his right to Writ of mandamus on Rule 9 read with Rule 11 of the Karnataka Medical Colleges (Selection for Admission) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). 5. Sri Gangi Reddy, learned C...
Shah Mansur Peer Dargah and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-01-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Kant118; 1980(1)KarLJ469
ORDER1. In these petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 28-4-1977 of the Administrator, Karnataka Board of Wakf (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') in Case No. LCC 40-3-M (Exhibit E in W. P. No. 4485 of 1977). As the challenge of the petitioners in all these cases is directed against one and the same order of the Board, I propose to dispose of them by a common order in the course of my order, I will refer to the documents produced by the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 4485 of 1977.2. An ancient Dargah called as 'Shah Mansur Peer Dargah of Bilgi' District Bijapur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Wakf) endowed with various properties had been registered as a public trust under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act of 1950 (Bombay Act No. XXIX of 1950) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bombay Act') (Exhibit C). The uniform Wakf Act of 1954 (Central Act No. 29 of 1954) (hereinafter 'referred to as 'The Act') was extended to t...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›