Karnataka Court March 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.
State of Karnataka Vs. Anjanappa and Co.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR1695; 1988(2)KarLJ118
ORDERPrem Chand Jain, C.J.1. These batches of Writ Appeals are disposed of by this judgment as a common question of law arises in all these appeals.2. The respondents ere all Excise Contractors. They are aggrieved by the amendment to Rule 15 of the Kama take Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as Rules.) The amendment in the rule is effected by Notification gazetted on 25-6-1983 which came into force with effect from 1-7-1983.3. Prior to the coming into force of the amendment in Rule 15 of the Rules, the rent not paid before the stipulated date, namely, 10th of a month, was liable to be charged with interest at the rate of 6 1/4%. By the amendment effected, the rate of interest in Rule 15 of the Rules, has been raised to 18%. The grievance of the Writ Petitioners is that they were adversely hit by the amendment brought about inasmuch as the raising of the rate of interest from 6 1/4% to 18% is arbitrary, unreasonable and excessive. Plea was also se...
State of Karnataka Vs. Jameer Pasha
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR1810; 1988(1)KarLJ315
Desai, J.1. The respondent was the accused in Sessions Case No. 7/82 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Mysore. He was tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. on the allegation that on 4-11-1981 at about 9 A.M. in his house in Gousia Nagar, he committed the murder of his wife Asraf Unnisa by assaulting her with the crow-bar (M.O.1).2. As the accused denied the commission of the offence, P.Ws-1 to 11 were examined and Exhibits P-1 to 12 and M.Os-1 to 17 were produced on behalf of the prosecution. Exhibits-D-1 to D-3 were got marked during the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses.3. Accepting the prosecution evidence, the learned trial Judge convicted the accused under Section 304 Part-II I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for five years. Hence, this appeal by the State against the acquittal of the accused for an offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. by obtaining leave.4. The accused has not preferred any appeal against his conviction un...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›