Karnataka Court August 1982 Judgments
A.G. Hariharan Vs. A.G. Singaravelu and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-05-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Kant213; ILR1983KAR145; 1982(2)KarLJ547
ORDER1. This matter arises out of office note put up in regard to the Court fee payable for issue of probate in this case. The question has arisen on account of the amendment made to the Karnataka Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act. 1958, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Court-fees Act') by the Karnataka Taxation Act and Certain Other Laws Amendment Act, 1982, (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act). By S. 4 of the Amendment Act, the Court-fees Act has been amended. We are concerned with the amendment made to Art. 6 of Schedule-: by which 5 per cent court-fee is payable where the amount of the value of the property in respect of which the grant of probate or letters is made exceeds 1000 rupees but does not exceed Rs. 3 lakhs and in all other cases if the amount exceeds Rs. 3 lakhs the probate duty chargeable is 10 per cent of the value of the estate.2. Probate Civil Petition No. 2/1982 was allowed by an order made by me on 31-3-1982. The practice of this Court has been to call u...
Tag this Judgment!Revanappa and anr. Vs. S.N. Ragunath
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-04-1982
Reported in: 1982(2)KarLJ350
ORDER1. This petition is directed against the order dated 28-4-1982 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimoga, in C.C. No. 55 of 1982 directing the police to seize and produce the articles in question before him. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent herein filed a private complaint under S. 200 Cr.P.C., before the Magistrate alleging that the petitioners herein have committed offences under sections 451, 448, 380 and 352 read with S. 34 I.P.C. and prayed that action may be taken against them. That complaint was filed on 21-4-1982. As could be made out from the proceedings, the complaint also filed I.A. No. I purported to be under S. 100 Cr.P.C., on the same day praying for issue of arrest warrant for search and seizure of the articles as listed in the application. On that day at the instance of the learned counsel for the complainant the case was adjourned to 22-4-1982, on which day the Magistrate recorded the sworn statements of the complainant and his two witness...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›