Karnataka Court July 1985 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.
Sulemankhan Vs. Mallappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-1985
Reported in: ILR1986KAR935
ORDERChandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. The only question which falls for determination in this revision under Section 115 of C.P.C is whether the tenant can be permitted to exercise his right conferred on him under Sub-section (1) of Section 24 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act after the decree has been passed and confirmed. In this case premises was sought on more than one ground. The Court of first instance decreed it on the only ground which it upheld and that was under Clause (i) of the proviso to Sub-section 1 of Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, that is, the premises is required bona fide for effecting repairs to the premises, which cannot otherwise be repaired.2. In regard to one another ground, namely, payment of arrears of rant, the Court of first instance did not uphold the case of the landlord. Tenant was at that time asked to exercise the option in regard to his right of re-allotment after the repairs are carried oat under Sub-section (1) of Section 24 of the Act. He de...
Gabrel Saver Fernandis Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR3113
ORDERDoddakale Gowda, J.1. Petitioners were all recruited as Talathis in erstwhile State of Bombay and, on reorganization, their services stood transferred to the new State of Karnataka. The mini-mum qualification for recruitment then in force was a passin School Leaving Certificate examination. Talathis, as submitted by Sri T. S. Ramachandra, Learned Counsel for petitioners, were all eligible for promotion as CircleInspectors, if they had continued in the erstwhile State of Bombay. On account of prescription of minimum qualification i.e., a pass in S.S.L.C., in the New State of Karnataka they are not eligible for promotion and there is no other avenue of promotion.2. Their main contention is that on account of denial of promotional avenue, they are entitled to a selection time scale which ordinarily will be the next higher scale of pay, as suggested by a committee constituted for the removal of anomaly from 'Tukol Pay Commission Report', captioned as, Implementation of Recommendations...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›