Karnataka Court February 1987 Judgments
Basappa and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-17-1987
Reported in: ILR1987KAR994; 1987(1)KarLJ351
ORDER1. In this petition the petitioners have sought to challenge the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Sessions Judge directing and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Haveri, to consider the 'B' Summary report afresh after giving an opportunity to the complainant to prove his case. 2. The petition arises in the way : Respondent-2 filed a complaint to the police, Haveri, alleging commission of the offences punishable under Ss. 147, 148, 427, 447, 504 and 506 r/w Section 149 I.P.C. On the said complaint the police registered case in Crime No. 229 of 1982 and issued F.I.R. to the Court. After completion of the investigation the police sent a 'B' summary report saying that the complaint was false. Although respondent-2 protested to the acceptance of the 'B' summary report by filing a protest memo, the Magistrate accepted the 'B' summary report. Being aggrieved thereby, respondent-2 - approached Sessions Judge in revision. The Sessions Judge, while allowing the revision, ha...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-13-1987
Reported in: [1990]185ITR155(KAR); [1990]185ITR155(Karn)
M.N. Venkatachaliah, J.1. Pursuant to the order dated August 7, 1985, in Civil Petition No. 542 of 1984, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has stated a case and referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on the written down value of roads and drains at the rates applicable to buildings ?' 2. The matter is covered by the pronouncement of this court in CIT v. Bangalore Turf Club Ltd. : [1984]150ITR23(KAR) . Following the said pronouncement, the question referred requires to be answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. Reference disposed of accordingly. No costs. 3. Sri Sarangan is permitted to file his vakalat for the respondent-assessee. ...
Tag this Judgment!Sharanappa Vs. Yellamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-12-1987
Reported in: ILR1988KAR1257; 1987(2)KarLJ334
K.A. Swami, J.1. One and the only question raised by Sri. Shivaraj Patil, learned Counsel for the appellant is that in the presence of the natural guardian the suit filed on behalf of the minor by next friend is not maintainable. Therefore, the Court below ought to have dismissed the suit as not maintainable.2. It is not possible to accept this contention. This is not a proceeding under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act. The suit is filed under Section 26 read with Order 7 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short the 'Code'). There is a specific provision Order 32 of the Code for appointment of Guardian or next friend for the minor in the suit. The provisions contained in Order 32 Rules 1 to 4 make it clear that there is a discretion vested in the Court to appoint the natural guardian or any other person as guardian or next friend of the minor as guardian-ad-litem. In addition to this any irregularity in the matter of appointment of next friend or guardian unless it is demonstrated...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Khader Vs. Mohammed Faizuddin
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-12-1987
Reported in: ILR1987KAR832
ORDERPatil, J.1. In this petition, the petitioners who are accused in C.C. No. 53/82, on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidar, have sought to challenge the legality and correctness of the process issued against them and confirmed by the Sessions Judge in revision.2. The case is instituted on a private complaint filed by the respondent alleging commission of the offences of criminal trespass and dacoity, punishable under Sections 447 & 395 IPC. The Learned Magistrate, after taking cognizance of the offences, proceeded to record the sworn statement of the complainant and three witnesses examined on his behalf as provided under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and thereafter he straight away directed to issue process against the accused, for the offences punishable under Sections 447 & 380 IPC. Aggrieved by the issue of process the petitioners approached the Sessions Judge in revision and the Sessions Judge having confirmed the same, they have come up with this petition.3. The grievance of...
Tag this Judgment!Balappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-12-1987
Reported in: ILR1987KAR1019; 1987(1)KarLJ320
Nesargi, J.1. Appellants are 13 in number. Two charge sheets were filed, involving all the accused and one Bhimanagouda Desai of Hadnoor village, Taluk Shorapur, by the Kembhavi Police, alleging that they had committed offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. The deceased is one Siddangouda of Yevoor village situated 5-6 kms. away from Hadnoor. Bhimanagouda Desai was shown as absconding.2. The cases were committed by two Committal orders to the Court of Sessions, Gulbarga. The Additional Sessions Judge, Gulbarga clubbed the two cases and held common trial. He re-arraigned the accused in the two cases as A-1 to A.13. The case against Bhimanagouda Desai was bifurcated as he was absconding.3. The prosecution case is that there were two factions, one headed by Channareddy of Hadnoor and the other by Bhimanagouda Desai of Hadanoor. All the accused belonged to the faction of Bhimanagouda Desai of Hadnoor while the deceased, his son PW-1; Shankargowda. PW-...
Tag this Judgment!M. Shankar Rao Vs. City Improvement Board
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: ILR1988KAR963; 1987(1)KarLJ99
ORDERDesai, J.1. The petitioner is the owner in possession of Sy. No. 58 ofKallahalli village, Shimoga Taluk, measuring 18 acres 18 guntas. Thesaid land is proposed for the residential use as per approved OutlineDevelopment Plan of Shimoga. On 20-6-1983, the petitioner made anapplication to the respondent under Section 31 of the KarnatakaImprovement Boards Act, 1976 (for short the 'Act') for grant ofsanction for the purpose of forming a layout as per the original ofAnnexure-A. The respondent-Board passed a Resolution on 18-11-1983refusing permission to the petitioner on the ground that therespondent itself was forming a layout including the land of thepetitioner. It was, however, communicated to the petitioner on10-1-1984 as per the original of Annexure-B i.e., beyond six monthsfrom the date of his application. Therefore, according to thepetitioner, as the respondent did not refuse sanction to thepetitioner within six months from the date of the receipt of hisapplication, such sanction...
Tag this Judgment!Ramdhari Yadav Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: ILR1987KAR815; 1987(1)KarLJ161
ORDER1. This revision petition coming before the Court for admission is taken up for final hearing at the request of the Counsel appearing on both sides. 2. The revision is directed against the order of interim custody passed by the Sessions judge in reversion of the order passed by the Magistrate. It relates to 100 chairs said to have been seized by the police during investigation of the case. 3. The petitioner who is the complainant and on whose complaint the police have sent charge-sheet on the respondent, made application for interim custody as provided under S. 451 and/or 457. While the Magistrate directed to entrust the interim custody of chairs to the petitioner on the ground that as claimed by him they belong to him and they had been removed by committing theft; the Sessions Judge on revision reversed that order on a different reason. 4. Having regard to the nature of the property which is said to be the subject matter of theft as alleged by the prosecution, there was hardly an...
Tag this Judgment!P. Keshava Adiga Vs. Additional District Magistrate
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-1987
Reported in: AIR1987Kant246; 1987(1)KarLJ129
ORDER1. Petitioner is admittedly a licencee dealer in petroleum products, particularly High Speed Diesel, at Hangarkatte in Udupi Taluk of Dakshina Kannada District. He is aggrieved by the 'no objection certificate' granted by respondent I Additional District Magistrate, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, in AR Case No. 804/8687. In the said case respondent 3 South Kanara District Co-operative Fish Marketing Federation of Mulihithlu in Mangalore applied for 'no objection certificate' to locate a high speed diesel out-let for the benefit of the members of that Federation, who apparently use mechanised power boats for fishing. There were number of objectors, among whom petitioner was one.2. Petitioner's objections were threefold. First was, that respondent 3 Federation itself does not own any boats and therefore it could not have applied for a consumer's out-let. The second objection was, there was no demand for high-speed diesel in the area and therefore there was no need for another out-let ...
Tag this Judgment!Quraish Educational Society and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-1987
Reported in: AIR1987Kant122
ORDER1. This matter is disposed of at the stage of preliminary hearing after notice to respondent and after hearing the Counsel for parties.2. The matter arises thus: The Ist petitioner is a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act. 1960, thereinafter referred to as the Act) having its office at Basavakalvan in Bidar District. Among other things, its main objects are to establish and administer educational institutions of its choice for which purpose it is incorporated and registered under the Act. It was promoted in 1972 by 9 Muslims. Petitioner No. 2, in this writ petition, is its President. The petitioners have asserted that the Muslims are a minority in the State of Karnataka, both on the basis of the language spoken and the religion professed by them. They have furnished a copy of the Memorandum of Association and rules and regulations of the 1st petitioner-Society. They have asserted that the membership is open only to Muslims. Since 1972, it has establis...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›