Karnataka Court February 1985 Judgments
D. Kumar Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-26-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR1450; 1985(1)KarLJ313
ORDER1. The petitioner is the accused in C.C. No. 765/81 on the file of the J.M.F.C. Nelamangala. On 8-3-1981 the Sub-Inspector of Excise, visited Madhu Wine Stores, situated at Bylappanapalya, Tumkur Road, Nelamangala, belonging to the accused and conducted a surprise raid. He found that the accused was in unlawful possession of 28.395 litres of un-accounted liquor contrary to S. 13(1) and punishable under S. 32 of the Karnataka Excise Act 1965. He seized the said quantity and arrested the accused on the same day. He filed the charge-sheet against the accused in the court below on 24-11-1981 for an offence punishable under S. 32 of the Karnataka Excise Act. The learned Magistrate issued summons to the accused. Hence, this revision petition by the accused. 2. The only point urged by Smt. Karpagam Kamath, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case after six months of the arrest of the accused contrary to the mandatory provision of S. 167(5) o...
Tag this Judgment!A.K. Mohideen and anr. Vs. N.M. Krishna Chettiar and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Kant240; ILR1985KAR2239; 1985(2)KarLJ367
ORDER1. By consent of learned Counsel, this civil revision petition directed against order dt. 30th Aug. 1983 made on I.A. XI in O. S. No. 388 of 1977 (O. S. No, 1767 of 1980) by the Court of City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, refusing to stay further proceedings in that suit, is treated as having been posted for hearing, and I have heard them.2. Whether the Court of City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, (trial Court) was justified in refusing to stay further proceedings in a suit for eviction pending against the defendants till the disposal of a fair rent application under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (the Act), subsequently filed by the defendants before the Controller under the Act, seeking fixation of fair rent in respect of the nonresidential premises concerned in the suit, is the short question which arises for determination in this revision petition.3. Undisputed facts of the case, which are material for determination of the question, are briefly these: Defendants in the suit...
Tag this Judgment!Y.R. Nagaraju Vs. United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-1985
Reported in: ILR1990KAR3590
M.N. Venkatachaliah, J.1. This appeal is in the list of cases for orders for the day. Respondents have been notified. The appeal is admitted and 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 appeal is by the claimants for enhancement of compensation arising out of a claim in a fatal accident's action. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Banglore Rural District, Bangalore, by its Award, dated 11-5-1984, made in MVC No. 115 of 1981 on its file, has awarded a compensation of Rs. 9,000/- for the death of Renuka, a house-wife aged 22 years. The claimants are the husband and the two minor sons, who were, then, aged 4 and 2 years, respectively.2. The accident occurred at about 7-30 p.m. on 2-4-1981 on the Bangalore-Mysore High way, near Byrapatna village. The deceased was a pillion rider on a scooter. Lorry TNJ 9707 which was proceeding in the opposite direction collided against the scooter. Both the dri...
Tag this Judgment!Devanidhi Thimmakka Vs. Dodda Thimmappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-22-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR1759
ORDERKulkarni, J.1. This is a revision by judgment debtors-1, 3 and 5 against the order dated 9-4-1980 passed by the Munsiff, Chitradurga, in Execution Case No. 152 of 1971 allowing I.A.No. 4 and recognising the assignment in favour of respondents 1 to 6.2. The decree holder Sanna Thimmakka had obtained a decree for maintenance against her son Devanidhi Sanaa Thimmappa in O.S.No. 430/51-52. She filed the present execution case No. 152/1971 to recover the arrears of maintenance from the L.Rs. of her son.3. The petitioners in I.A.No. 4 contended that the said decree holder Sanna Thimmakka had assigned the decree in their favour on 16-9-1971 and that thus they should be brought on record.4. The Learned Counsel Shri Rangaraju submitted that the assignment itself was bad at law under Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act. Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act prohibits the transfer of a right to future maintenance, in whatsoever manner arising, secured or determined. The Learned Aut...
Tag this Judgment!Gopalakrishna Narayana Hegde Vs. Venkataramana Narayana Bhat
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-22-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR1756
ORDERKulkarni, J.1. This is a revision by the decree holder against the order dated 2-9-1980 passed by the Munsiff, Sirsi, in Execution Case No. 30 of 1978 holding that judgment debtor-1 is a*CRP No. 2278 of 1981 dated 22nd February 1985debtor within the meaning of the Karnataka Debt Relief Act and thus he dismissed the execution.2. The decree holder sued out execution against Judgment-Debtor-1 and another for recovery of money. Judgment-Debtor-1 contended that he was a small farmer and a person belonging to the weaker sections of the people within the meaning of the Karnataka Debt Relief Act and thus the decree debt stood wiped out.3. The lower Court held that Judgment-Debtor 1 was not a person belonging to the weaker sections of the people. But it held that he was a small farmer within the meaning of the Karnataka Debt Relief Act and thus it dismissed the execution. Hence the revision by the decree holder.4. The decree holder produced the record of rights extracts to show that Judgme...
Tag this Judgment!Gajanan Shivappa Hegde Vs. Nelemav Group Seva Sahakari Sangha
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-22-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR3685
ORDERRama Jois, J.1.The petitioner has presented this Petition praying for quashing the order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal setting aside the order of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies made in a dispute raised under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co operative Societies Act, 1959, ('the Act for short').2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows :The 1st respondent is a Co-operative Society functioning under the Act. Annual General Meeting of the Members of the Society for the calendar year 1980-83 was scheduled to be held on 25-8-1983. One of the agenda for the meeting was the election of 9 members for the Managing Committee. The Assistant Agricultural Officer had been nominated by the Society to be the Returning Officer. He issued Calendar of events on 14-7-1983, copy of which is produced atAnnexure-B. According to the calendar of events, last date and time for receipt of nomination papers was 18-8-1983, 5.00 P.M. The calendar of events also stated that the a...
Tag this Judgment!S.B. Mamle Desai Vs. Controller of Estate Duty and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-1985
Reported in: [1985]155ITR667(KAR); [1985]155ITR667(Karn)
Puttaswamy, J.1. One Bullappa Basavanthappa Mamle Desai hereafter referred as B. M. Desai of Dharwad District who was the holder of certain 'watan' property within the meaning of that term occurring in s. 4 of Bombay Hereditary Offices Act of 1874,was a member of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) consisting of himself, his four sons (one of whom is petitioner) and other members of family. Under the Bombay paragana and kulkarni Watans (Abolition) Act of 1950, the said lands were regranted to B.M.Desai. 2. B. M. Desai died on may 26, 1957, and on his death,the petitioner as accountable person under the E. D. Act of 1953 (Central Act 34 of 1953)('the Act'),filed a return before the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty,Hubli ('ACED'), inter alia claiming that only one-seventh share of the deceased in the said watan property which was joint family property had passed on his death and that share alone was assessable to estate duty under the Act and not the entire property. But, the ACED, by his ...
Tag this Judgment!A. Ekambara Vs. K. Leela
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR2233; 1985(2)KarLJ246
ORDERVenkataehala, J.1. Whether a person carrying on certain ' business in a premises of which he is a tenant, if acquires a building suitable for carrying on such business, can avoid eviction under clause (p) of the Proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 ('the Act'), merely because the building so acquired is intended to be used or is used for carrying on a different business, is the question which is raised for my determination in this revision petition.2. Material facts, which have led to the raising of the above question for determination in this Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, are briefly these : In the year 1976, Smt. K.Leela, the Respondent here, filed in the Court of Munsiff at Mangalore ('Trial Court') an eviction petition under Section 21 of the Act, against B. Narasappa, the father of the petitioners here, respecting a non-residential premises ('the petition premises') in Mangalore town...
Tag this Judgment!Rubbani Rice Mills Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR3601
ORDERK.A. Swami, J.1.The petitioner is a miller as well as a dealer. In this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, he has sought for quashing the order dated 28-2-1984 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga in No. FSD. PRC. 21/11/83-84 produced as Annexure-E. The petitioner has also sought for a direction to the 2nd Respondent to issue release certificate to enable him to transport 400 quintals of rice outside the State.2. The facts necessary for deciding the contentions raised by the petitioner are not in dispute. Under the provisions of the Karnataka Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1981, (hereinafter referred to as the Levy Order 1981) thepetitioner has surrendered 400 quintals of rice towards levy as per clause-3 of the Levy Order, 1981. This surrender is evidenced by the F.C.I. acknowledgments bearing Nos. 3537 dated 6-7-1983, 3447 dated 7-7-1983, 3545 dated 7-7-1983 and 3561 dated 11-7-1983. These acknowledgments have not been endorsed to show that the l...
Tag this Judgment!Busunur Industries Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-20-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR1322; [1986]61STC123(Kar)
Puttaswamy, J. 1. This appeal is by the assessee and is directed against the order dated 10th January, 1983, of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Karnataka, Bangalore (Commissioner), in Case No. SMR.7/81-82 revising the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Bangalore Division, Bangalore (DC), and restoring the order of the Commercial Tax Officer, Chitradurga (CTO). 2. For the calendar year 1973 which is also the assessment year, the assessee filed his return before the CTO under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act of 1957 (Karnataka Act 25 of 1957) (the Act), inter alia showing a turnover of Rs. 1,53,952.41 as purchase return of tamarind seeds. On an examination of that return, the CTO completed his assessment on 22nd April, 1975, bringing to tax the aforesaid sum of Rs. 1,53,952.41 under section 6 of the Act. Against the said order of the CTO the petitioner filed an appeal in Appeal No. 77/75-76 before the DC, who by his order dated 23rd June, 1975, allowed the s...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »