Karnataka Court November 1988 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.
Tungbhadra Sugar Works Private Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1988
Reported in: 1989(19)ECC94; 1990LC202(Karnataka); 1992(61)ELT592(Kar)
ORDER1. This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Davanagere dated 9-3-1987 rejecting the representation made by the petitioner dated 27-2-1987 not considering the claim for payment of balance amount of Rs. 3,43,203.55 under rebate in respect of sugar produced by the petitioner-factory in excess of the average production of the corresponding period of preceding three sugar years vide Notification dated 28-4-1978, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-A. 2. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act. It manufactures sugar at its factory situated at Harige, Shimoga Taluk and District. A Notification was issued by the Central Government on 28-4-1978 in exercise of its power under Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (in short 'the Rules'). The said notification conferred exemption on the sugar produced by any factory during the period commencing from 1st May, 1978 and ending with 30th day of September...
Veerayya Siddaramayya Hasavimath Vs. Zilla Parishad
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR159; 1988(3)KarLJ215
Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The appellants are the Writ Petitioners. They sought the quashing of the nominations of respondents 3 and 4 as Members of Balehosur Mandal Panchayat, as per notification dated 14-12-1987 published by the Deputy Commissioner, on the basis of the nominations made by the Zilla Parishad. The petitioners also sought for a declaration that respondents 3 and 4 are not eligible to be nominated under Section 5(3) of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya Panchayats, Act, 1983 (referred as 'the Act').2. The four petitioners are the elected Members of the Mandal Panchayat. According to the petitioners 24 Members were elected to the Mandal Panchayat, out of whom 13 belonged to Congress-1 party and 11 belonged to Janatha Party, in the election held in January 1987. The Adhyaksha of the Zilla Parishad, in the purported exercise of power entrusted to him by the Zilla Parishad, nominated two Members as the Members of the said Mandal...
A. Gopal Naidu Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-1988
Reported in: [1989(59)FLR16]; 1989(1)KarLJ189; (1995)IIILLJ692Kant
P.P. Bopanna, J. 1. These petitions are disposed of by a common order since a common question arises for consideration in all these petitions.2. The petitioner is the proprietor of a cinema theatre known as 'Sujatha Theatre' and he has challenged the correctness and the validity of the orders made by the Labour Court, Bangalore, on certain applications made by the workmen employed by him under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act and certain awards made by the very same Labour Court on references made by the State Government referring the disputes raised by his workmen touching the validity of the termination of their services. Though these petitions were filed in the year 1980, they were not disposed of even after a lapse of nearly eight years on account of some confusion in the submissions made by the learned advocate for the petitioner that these matters had been referred to a Division Bench. When these petitions were posted before the Division Bench, the Division Bench af...
Kalappa Manappa Kummar Vs. Assistant Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR988
ORDERK.A. Swami, J1. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution the petitioner has sought for quashing the order dated 20th September 1988 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Haveri in RTS: AP.20/88 Annexure-G. By the said order, the Assistant Commissioner has set aside the mutation entry No. 1393 made in respect of the lands bearing S.No. 73/2B and 73/2A of Yellapur Tarpe Honnathi village. After setting aside the mutation entry, the Assistant Commissioner has reserved liberty to the petitioner to have the land measured by the Assistant Director of Land Records, and get the revenue records corrected according to the measurement.2. The contention of the petitioner is that the appeal was preferred after a lapse of 14 years and there was no application filed for condonation of delay. Therefore the Assistant Commissioner acted illegally in entertaining the appeal. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Rule 16 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rule...
A. Gopal Naidu Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR1394
ORDERBopanna, J. 1. These petitions are disposed of by a common order since a common questions arise for consideration in all the petitions.2. The petitioner is the proprietor of a Cinema Theatre known as 'Sujatha Theatre' and he has challenged the correctness and the validity of the orders made by the Labour Court, Bangalore on certain applications made by the workmen employed by him under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (in short the I.D.Act) and certain awards made by the very same Labour Court on references made by the State Government referring the disputes raised by his workmen touching the validity of the termination of their services. Though these petitions were filed in the year 1980, they were not disposed of even after a lapse of nearly 8 years on account of some confusion in the submissions made by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that these matters had been referred to a Division Bench. When these petitions were posted before the Division Bench, the Di...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›