Karnataka Court June 1983 Judgments

Dasappa Vs. Southern Railways

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1986KAR301

ORDERRama Jois, J.1. In this Writ petition, in which an ex railway servant, has questioned the legality of the order dated 21-12-1981 (Annexure-D) made by the General Manager, Southern Railway, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner and confirming the order dated 19-10-1981 (Annexure C) made by the Chief Operating Superintendent, by which the penalty of reduction in rank for a period of one year imposed by the disciplinary authority and confirmed by the appellate authority, was reviewed and the penalty of compulsory retirement was imposed, the following important question of Jaw arises for consideration :--Whether the High Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction and power under Article 226 of the Constitution, can modify the penalty imposed on a civil servant, by an authority competent under the service rules to impose such penalty and impose a lesser penalty?2. The facts of the case are as follows :--The petitioner was working as a Driver in the Southern Railways. A departmental inqui...

H. Ramaprasad Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bangalore

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1983]54STC265(Kar)

Rajasekhara Murthy, J.1. The petitioner is a wholesale wine merchant doing business in Mysore and a dealer registered under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act. The petitioner indented Golden Eagle Beer from M/s. Mohan Meakins Breweries Ltd., Mohan Nagar, Khopoli, Uttar Pradesh, and the said liquor was transported in a vehicle bearing registration No. MEQ-2790 from Khopoli in Uttar Pradesh to Mysore. The said vehicle was checked by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, in-charge of the Sales Tax Check Post, Kumarapatnam near Harihar, on 20th May, 1978. The truck was being driven by one Iqbal Singh and the truck contained 700 cartons of Golden Eagle Beer. The driver was called to the check post and was asked to produce documents in respect of the goods. Since the driver did not produce the bill of sale or a delivery note, though he tendered some documents which were with him, a notice was issued to him under section 28A(4) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, call...

Abdul Khadar Mohammad Gous Attigeri Vs. State

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1985KAR175

ORDERVenkatesh, J.1. In Cr. R.P. No.705/82 the Petitioners, who are accused in C.C. No.616 of 1982 on the file of the Munsiff and J.M.F.C., Savanur, are challenging the order dated 15-9-82 of that Court issuing summons for their appearance in theCourt,2. In Cr. R.P. No. 706/82 the Petitioners, who are accused in C.C. No. 230 of 1982 on the file of the Additional Munsiff, Jamkhandi, are similarly challenging the order dated 31-7-1982 of that Court issuing summons to them to appear before that Court.3. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these Petitions they were clubbed and heard together.4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned State Public Prosecutor, who was requested to offer his views on behalf of the State, were heard in the matter.5. The main contention of the Petitioners in these two cases is that in the matter of taking cognizance of the offences and issuing process against them (the Petitioners) the Magistrates had not followed the procedu...

Sreeshyla Industries Employees' Union Vs. State Bank of India and Anr. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1985]57CompCas639(Kar); 1984(2)KarLJ105

Venkatachaliah, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated April 22, 1983, made by the learned company judge, in Company Petition No. 8 of 1980, directing advertisement of the winding-up petition filed by the State Bank of India for an order of winding up of the company M/s. Hegde and Golay Ltd., on ground that the company is unable to pay its debts and that it is just equitable that should wound up under cls. (e) and (f) of s. 433 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'). 2. Shreeshyla Industrial Employees Union (Regd.) which claims to represent the workmen of the company is aggrieved by the order of the learned company judge directing advertisement of the winding-up petition on the ground that the workmen who had a right to be heard at the stage of issue of the citation and who had made two application, C.A. No. 109 of 1980 and C.A. No. 774 of 1980, in that behalf specifically seeking an opportunity of being heard, were not afforded opportunity of being heard. 3. ...

Sreeshyla Industries Employees' Union Vs. State Bank of India and Ors. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (1984)IILLJ451Kant

Venkatachalaiah, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 22nd April, 1983 made by the learned Company Judge, in Company Petition No. 8 of 1980, directing advertisement of the winding-up petition filed by the State Bank of India for an order of winding-up of the Company M/s. Hegde and Golay Limited, on grounds that the Company is unable to pay its debts and that it is just and equitable that it should be wound-up under Clauses (e) and (f) of S. 433 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'). 'Shreeshyla Industries Employees Union (Regd.)' which claims to represent the workmen of the Company is aggrieved by the order of the learned Company Judge directing advertisement of the winding-up petition on the ground that the workmen who had a right to be heard at the stage of issue of the citation and who had made two applications C.A. 109/80 and C.A. 744/80 in that behalf specifically seeking an opportunity of being heard, were not afforded an opportunity of being heard. 2...

S. Murugeshappa and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. Cr.P. No. 498 of 1983 and the petitions of Sharamma and Yenkanna, are under Section 438 of the Criminal P.C., 1973 (the Code); and Cr.Ps. Nos. 499 and 500 of 1983 are under Section 439 of the Code. 2. Since common questions of law and facts arise in these cases they were clubbed and heard together. 3. In all these cases the local police have registered cases against these petitioners for alleged violations of certain orders issused under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (the Act). 4. The allegations against the petitioners in Cr.Ps. Nos. 498, 499 and 500 of 1983 are that they, as wholesale dealers in foodgrains, rice and paddy, had violated Karnataka Foodgrains Declaration of Stock Order, 1967 and R. 8 of Karnataka Food Grains (Wholesale) Dealers Licensing Order, 1964, and thereby had committed offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Act. Their mill premises were raided and the available stock of foodgrains and account books seized. 5. The complaint against Sharamm...

V.R. Rajagopilaiah Setty Vs. N. Radhakrishna

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1984Kant128

ORDER1. The revision petition by the landlord is directed against the order dated 22-4-1978 passed by, the District Judge, Kolar, in H. R. C. R. P. No.70 of 1976 setting aside the order of eviction passed by the Munsiff, K. G. F. in H.R.C. No.17 of 1973.2. The parties have been referred to in -the course of this order with reference to their position In the trial Court.3. The petitioner-landlord filed the petition under Section 21(a)(b) and (4) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, alleging that the Schedule premises had been leaked out to the opponent-tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 50/- and that he had -executed rent note dated 1-7-1960 and that he had fallen in arrears to the. tune of As. 350/- According to him the opponent-tenant demolished the wall existing in the schedule premises of the eastern side between verandah (passage) and the room and he has constructed it new wall in the room portion. This is in violation of clause (o) of Section 108 of the T. P. Act He has unlawfull...

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Karanata ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (1983)37CTR(Kar)175; [1984]149ITR795(KAR); [1984]149ITR795(Karn)

1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has referred the following two questions under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act for the opinion of this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assesses company is not entitled to carry forward any loss and unabsorbed depreciation allowances of Hindustan Aircraft Ltd. (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assesses company has not succeeded M/s. Hindustan Aircraft Ltd., by inheritance ?' 2. The essential facts behind the legal formulation are as follows : There are two companies incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, in the public sector, the Hindustan Aircraft Ltd. and the Aeronautics India Ltd., and engaged in the manufacture and production of aircraft, aero-engines accessories and missiles. The Government of India decided to amalgamate these two companies into a single company cal...

M. Subba Raju Vs. Syed Mahaboob and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: II(1984)ACC340

G.N. Sabhahit, J.1. As a result of the motor accident that happened on 4-7-78 the petitioner-claimant suffered fracture of the hip bone in addition to its dislocation. Though he was treated in the Victoria Hospital by Dr. Gyanchand P.W. 1 his right leg has become shorter by 11/2'. Right hip joint movements are restricted. Even ordinary walking has become difficult for him. He has to limp his way throughout his life, He cannot move without a walking stick. He cannot sit with crossed legs. He has to use commode for answering calls of nature. For all these and for pain and suffering and disability incurred he claimed Rs. 1,96,500/- as compensation. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 90,000/- as general damages and Rs. 7,500/- as special damages. Aggrieved by the said award the claimant has instituted MFA No. 100/80 claiming enhanced compensation.2. As against that, the insurance company has instituted MFA No. 1419/79 contending inter alia that the compensation awarded is on the high side.3. The...

D. Bhagayamma and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: II(1984)ACC68

G.N. Sabhahit, J.1. This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award dated 17.7.1979 passed by the Claims Tribunal, Karwar, in MVC No. 45/ 77 on its file awarding compensation of Rs. 29,970/- to the claimants.2. The learned Counsel for the appellants contended before us that the global compensation so awarded was very much on the lower side.3. The sole point, therefore, that arises for our consideration in this appeal is: Whether the compensation awarded is just and proper?.4. It is not in dispute that the deceased was aged 48 years at the time of his death and was drawing Rs. 1,120/- as monthly salary, he being an Assistant Engineer. It is further on record that in the normal course he should have been promoted as an Executive Engineer in about 3 years in which case his salary would have increased and he would have drawn Rs. 1,500/- as monthly salary in addition to the allowances. The claimants further averred that there was longevity in their family and therefo...