Karnataka Court January 1984 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.
Krishna Products Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-12-1984
Reported in: [1984]56STC190(Kar)
Jagannatha Shetty, J. 1. The common question involved in these petitions is : Whether the unflavored liquid sugar (golden syrup) sold by the assessee falls within entry 31-B of the Fifth Schedule to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act Entry 31-B reads : 'Sugar other than sugar candy, confectionery and the like.' 2. It is not in dispute that the assessee converted sugar into liquid by boiling it to a certain temperature after adding water and salt and that was sold in bottles to confectioners and bakers. All the authorities below have held that sugar in the form of syrup prepared by the assessee cannot get exemption as simple sugar. It seems to us that the view taken by the authorities is not unreasonable. Entry 31-B means sugar and not any form of sugar or variety of sugar. Varieties of sugar may fall within the meaning of the word 'sugar', but not forms of sugar. Syrup is a form of sugar and certainly the assessee cannot claim the benefit of entry 31-B. 3. The revision petitions are, therefor...
Gurappa Tippanna Totad Vs. Gangavva and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-11-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Kant198
1. This second Appeal by the defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dt. 29-9-1975, passed by the Civil Judge, Hubli, in R. A. No. 22/1968, setting aside the judgment and decree dt. 27-11-1967, passed by the Munsiff, Savanur, in L. C. No. 23 of 1962.2. The parties have been referred to in the course of this appeal with reference to their position in the trial Court.3. The plaintiff Gangavva filed the suit L. C. No. 23 of 1962 for partition and possession alleging that she had been married to one Shivappa Totad, the elder brother of defendant No. 1 Gurappa Tipparma Totad and that her husband Shivappa Totad died on 9-1-1951 and thus she was entitled to a half share in the suit properties which were the joint family properties.4. The defendant No. 1 Gurappa Tippanna Totad contested the suit alleging that his brother Shivappa Totad had bequeathed his half share in the properly in his favour and that Gangavva was living in adultery and was guilty of unchastity and therefore sh...
Hutchaiah Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-11-1984
Reported in: ILR1985KAR1048
ORDERK. A. Swami, J.1. Though this, Petition is posted for orders by, consent of parties, it is taken up for final hearing as it involves a short point2. In this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioner has sought for quashing the order dated 12th November 1981 passed by the Registrar General of Money Lenders and Pawn Brokers in Karnataka refusing to renew Money Lenders Licence for the year 1980, and also the order dated 18/19-2-1981 bearing No. RML. 2776/80-81 passed by the Registrar of Money Lenders, Bangalore City. It is not in dispute that the application for renewal has been filed beyond the time. Under Rule 5(2) of the Karnataka Money Lenders Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), an application for renewal of licence is required to be made on any day within two months prior to the expiry of the licence. The authority has dismissed the application on the ground that the application is filed beyond the time. Therefore, it | need not be enquired i...
Syndicate Bank Vs. Southern Oils and Extractions Limited and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-09-1984
Reported in: [1985]57CompCas81(Kar)
Chandrakantaraj Urs, J. 1. This petition is under ss. 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, by the Syndicate Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Under takings) Act, 1979, praying for an order of the court winding up the first respondent company. Respondents Nos. 2 to 12 are said to be its directors. 2. Respondents Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 11 are served represented while the others, through served have remained absent and unrepresented and this orders made against those respondents ex parte. 3. The petitioner has alleged that a total sum of Rs. 45,82,566.84 was advanced to the first respondent company. The aforementioned amount claimed is said to be the balance shown in the books of the company under various accounts held by the first respondent company with the bank. It is also asserted that the amounts claimed by the petitioner-bank is also reflected in the balance-sheet of the first respondent company for the year ended ...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Karnataka Electricity Board
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-06-1984
Reported in: ILR1987KAR2552
Venkatachaliah, J.1. This appeal is by the Railway Administration of the Union of India, defendant in O.S. No. 94 of 1978, on the file of the Civil Judge, Haveri, and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 18-9-1982, decreeing the claim of the Karnataka State Electricity Board, the plaintiff in the suit, for refund of Rs. 21,456--10 alleged to have been wrongly recovered by the defendant by way of what are referred to as the 'wharfage' and 'demurrage' charges respecting the consignment of a Transformer and its accessories sent through the Railway by the New Government Electric Factory Ltd., Bangalore from By yappanahalli Railway Station at Bangalore to be delivered to the plaintiff at Haveri in Dharwar District.The appeal was admitted on 4-4-1983. The matter has now come up for orders on the prayer for interlocutory application for stay. With the consent of learned Counsel on both sides the appeal is taken up for final hearing, heard and disposed of by this Judgment.The part...
P.i. Chermana Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Virajpet
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-1984
Reported in: [1984]147ITR688(KAR); [1984]147ITR688(Karn)
1. For the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76, the petitioner filed his returns under the Karnataka agricultural Income tax Act, 1957 (Karnataka Act 22 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), before the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Virajpet, Coorg District (hereinafter referred to as the AITO), who on their examination, completed the assessments and recovered the taxes due thereon also. Some time thereafter, the AITO by two separate but similar notices dated November 22, 1976, (Exhibits A and B) purporting to be under s. 36 of the Act, called upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the agricultural income derived from the lands standing in the names of his four sons should not be included in his income for the aforesaid assessment years as escaped income with penalties thereon, under s. 22 of the Act. In answer to those notices, the petitioner filed objections, inter alia, contending that the properties had been separately purchased by his sons in the year 1962-63 and ...
Carnatic Coffee Co. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, I Circle, Davanagere
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-1984
Reported in: [1985]58STC367(Kar)
ORDERPuttaswamy, J. 1. For the assessment year 1963-64 (Ugadi year), the petitioner was a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the file of the Commercial Tax Officer, Davanagere (hereinafter referred to as the CTO), who by his order dated 31st October, 1967 (exhibit-A) assessed him under that Act to a tax of Rs. 10,667.98 on inter-State sale transactions of coffee effected during the said year. Against the said order of the CTO, the petitioner filed an appeal in Appeal No. CST. AP 14/67-68 before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the DC), who by his order dated 20th March, 1968 (exhibit-B) allowed the said appeal and held that the petitioner was not liable to pay any Central sales tax for the said period and cancelled the assessment of the CTO. In allowing the said appeal, the DC was guided by the law declared by this Court in Yaddalam Lakshminarasimhiah Setty v. State ...
Ritz Hotels (Mysore) Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Kant149
ORDER1. In this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought for transfer of Miscellaneous Appeal No. 26/1983, pending on the file of the 4th respondent, to the 3rd respondent for being heard and decided along with the Miscellaneous Appeal No. 13/1983 which is pending on the file of the 3rd respondent. 2. Both the appeals arise out of the same order passed by the Competent Officer (Respondent No. 2) under the provisions of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The two premises known as Hotel Metropole, and Hotel Krishna Raja Sagara situated at Mysore and Krishnaraja Sagara respectively were leased to the petitioner. Hotel Krishnaraja sagar is situated in the District of Mandya whereas Hotel Metropole is situated in Mysore District at Mysore. As the petitioner failed to comply with the terms of the lease, the second respondent (the Competent Officer) has initiated a proceedin...
Road Transport Corporation (P) Ltd. and Etc. Vs. the Assistant Regiona ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-05-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Kant174; ILR1984KAR429; 1984(2)KarLJ283
Puttaswamy, J. 1. On a reference made by one of us (Puttaswamy, J.), these cases were posted before us for disposal.2. As the principal challenge of the petitioners is to one and the same enactment and the orders made by the authorities are on that basis, these petitions can conveniently be disposed of by a common order. We, therefore, propose to dispose of them by a common order.3. All the petitioners are register-ad owners of 'Transport Vehicles' within the meaning of that term occurring in S. 2(33) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the M. V. Act) and have been issued with the necessary registration certificates in their favour under the said Act.4. In order to appreciate the questions that arise for determination in these cases, it is not necessary to notice the facts in all the cases and it is enough to notice the facts in writ petitions Nos. 1406 of 1980, 3570 of 1982 and 15249 of 1982 in some detail as illustrative and not exhaustive, which we propose to...
Shakthi Beneficial Corporation (In Liquidation) Vs. C. Balasubramanyam
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-04-1984
Reported in: [1984]56CompCas441a(Kar)
Chandrakantaraj Urs, J. 1. This is an application under s. 446(2)(b) the Companies Act, 1956, made by the official liquidator praying for an order directing the respondent to pay to him a sum of Rs. 5,948, being the loan amount due by him together with interest and notice charges in respect of the loans advanced by M/s. Shakti Beneficial Corporation to the company in liquidation. The principal amount advanced consisted of two loans of Rs. 2,000 each against promissory notes excused on December 18, 1975, and February 26, 1976, did not meet with any sucess. Therefore, the application was filed. 2. Respondent has entered appearance through counsel. But, on November 10, 1983, none appeared for the respondent and in that petition respondent was placed ex perte. However, the court recorded that the claimant must prove that the loans were not barred by the law of limitation. In that circumstance, on November 23, 1983 evidence was recorded for the claimant and six documents were marked to whic...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »