Karnataka Court June 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.
K. Subbaraju Vs. Dattamurthy
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-20-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR792
ORDERBalakrishna, J.1. This is a Civil Revision Petition filed by the two tenants who are aggrieved by the order passed on I.A.II In H.R.C. No.2228/84 dated 42-4-1985. The 1st respondent in this case was allotted the petition schedule house by the 2nd respondent.2. The facts of the case, which are essential for the purpose of disposal of this revision petition, are, briefly, as follows:In an earlier eviction petition filed in H.R.C. No. 19/83, the 1st respondent was the sole petitioner suing respondents-1 and 2 for eviction in respect of the same premises which is the subject matter of the subsequent eviction petition in H.R.C.No.2228/84. So far as the respondents are concerned, they are common to both H.R.C.Nos.19/83 and 2228/84.3. At some stage of the proceedings, the 1st respondent, who was the petitioner in H.R.C. 19/83 filed a memo on 16-7-1934 in Court (before the Court of Small Causes, Bangalore City) to the effect that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the petition. T...
B. Ganesha Krishna Bhat Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-17-1988
Reported in: [1989]73STC267(Kar)
ORDERS.R. Rajasekhara Murthy, J. 1. The petitioners in these writ petitions are the licensees conducting video shows by exhibiting cinematograph films on television screen through video cassette recorder and are holding licenses issued by the Karnataka Exhibition of Films on television screen through Video-cassettes Recording (Regulation) Rules, 1984. (Hereinafter referred to as 'the VCR Rules'). 2. The term 'cinematograph show' occurring in the definition of 'entertainment' in section 2(e) of the Karnataka Entertainments Tax Act, 1958, was amended by an explanation inserted in section 2(e) by Act 3 of 1986 to include video show. 3. Section 4B was also inserted by Act 3 of 1985 providing for levy and collection of tax under the Karnataka Entertainments Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The said section 4B reads as under : '4B. Special provision in respect of video shows. - In lieu of the tax payable under sections 3, 3A, 4 or 4A, subject to such rules as may be pres...
Dattatreya Raghavendra Patki Vs. Sumitrabai
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-17-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR701; 1988(2)KarLJ335
ORDERBalakrishna, J.1. This is a Revision Petition directed against the order dated 4-4-1984 passed by the Rent Controller, Belgaum, in DC.RNT.SR.8/82-83 fixing the fair rent of the petition premises at Rs. 250/- per month.2. This order of the Rent Controller is challenged mainly on the ground that the fair rent fixed by the Rent Controller is unfair for the reason that it is in contravention of Section 14(4)(i) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). According to the petitioner, since the premises in question came into existence prior to April 1947 which fact cannot be disputed in the light of the documents produced by the tenant himself through rental receipts, there cannot be an increase exceeding 25% of the rate of rent or rental value referred to in Sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Act since the old rent all along paid does not exceed Rs. 50/- per month, which fact also is not disputed. In the instant case, the Rent Controller has fixed ...
K. Narayan Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR1810
ORDERShyamasundar, J1. To a Doctor in distress we say 'physician heal thyself'. What shall we say to a policeman the preserver of peace and to whom the life and liberty of a citizen is in the usual course entrusted to his care is himself in trouble and seeks the protection of the law to secure his freedom. That precisely is the question herein for consideration in this application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail, the applicant being a Senior I.P.S. Officer, who was serving as D.C.P. West, Bangalore till the 2nd May, 1988, on which date he was taken into custody by the Central Bureau of Investigation ('C.B.I' for short) an organisation based at New Delhi to which the investigation of the case, which has since come to be known in popular parlance as the 'Rasheed murder case', has been handed over. Having regard to the prosecution's case, as now and even before, the locale being the City of Bangalore, it should have been normally investigated by the police of Karnataka. In fa...
Mahadevaswamy and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR1970
ORDER1. These Criminal Petitions are filed under S. 482 of the Cr.P.C. (the 'Code' for short) and are directed against the preliminary orders made by the Taluka Executive Magistrate, Tumkur Taluk, Tumkur under S. 111 of the Code. Under the orders, challenged in these petitions, the Taluka Executive Magistrate has asked the petitioner in each of the petitions to show cause as to why he should not be ordered to execute a bond for Rs. 2,000/- with a surety for a like sum for keeping peace. 2. The petitions were listed for admission with copies of the petitions being served on the learned State Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent. They have been heard finally by consent of the learned Advocate for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State. 3. Since the question of law involved in these petitions is common, the petitions are disposed of by this common order. Keep the original order in the records and proceedings of Criminal Petition No. 694/1988 ...
State Bank of Mysore Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1988
Reported in: (1988)74CTR(Kar)52; [1989]175ITR607(KAR); [1989]175ITR607(Karn); 1988(2)KarLJ187
Rajendra Babu, J.1. The assessee is a banking company. The assessee filed a return for the year 1976-77 admitting chargeable interest of Rs. 10,17,25,410. The assessee claimed that rediscount charges paid of Rs. 36,40,206 and interest earned on overdue bills of Rs. 84,77,124 should not be taxed. The Income-tax Officer rejected both these claims and brought the two sums to tax. on appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the said order. On further appeal, the Tribunal held that in respect of the rediscount, the assessee was entitled to a deduction, but, on the other question, agreed with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that the interest is charged for the user of the funds beyond the stipulated time and the transaction results in earning of interest within the meaning of section 2(7) of the Interest-tax Act, 1974, and upheld the assessment on this item. 2. Three questions have been referred by the Tribunal for our opinion and they are : '1. Whether, on the facts and c...
Zoo Authority of Karnataka Vs. Ranga
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1988
Reported in: I(1989)ACC197; [1989(58)FLR212]; ILR1988KAR2926; 1988(2)KarLJ347; (1989)ILLJ237Kant
Venkatachala, J.1. By consent of learned Counsel, this appeal is treated as having been posted for hearing and we have heard them. 2. Zoo Authority of Karnataka has filed this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('the Act'), questioning the validity of an order of the Commissioner for Workman's Compensation, Mysore District, Mysore (the Commissioner') by which it is directed to pay as compensation a sum of Rs. 9,114/- to the respondent. 3. Antecedent material facts, which bear on the contentions raised in the appeal, may be briefly referred to here with advantage. Sri Chamarajendra Zoological Gardens at Mysore ('the Zoological Gardens') was formerly an establishment of the Department of Horticulture of the Government of Karnataka, its employees being Government servants. That establishment stood transferred in its entirety along with the servants working there to the Zoo Authority of Karnataka (the appellant) after its registration as a society under the Kar...
Venkateswara Oil Mills Vs. Syndicate Bank
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-13-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Kant225; 1989(1)KarLJ31
ORDER1. This matter coming up for orders on I.A.II, the same is disposed of by the following order, after hearing the Counsel for the petitioners.2. This is a judgment-debtors' revision and is' directed against the order of the Executing Court in Execution Petition No. 2/78 on the file of the Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Koppal, Raichur District. The judgment-debtors admittedly are due in some amount to the decree-holder. The immovable properties were brought to sale in public auction in execution of the decree. The auction purchaser made an application praying for permission to deposit the balance of the sale price under the receipt order make the deposit. At that time the judgment-debtors filed objections and that was posted for arguments.3. At that stage, this revision petition has been filed and stay of confirmation of sale has been obtained.4. If the decree is not fully satisfied, the decree-holder is entitled to bring the other properties of the judgment-debtors to sale in execution...
K. Laxmi Vs. Sub-inspector of Police (Traffic-west) and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-13-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Kant311; 1988(2)KarLJ292
ORDER1. The facts of the case in brief are as follows The petitioner is a stage carriage operator plying several stage carriages in the city of Mangalore and also in the District of Dakshina Kannada and beyond. The grievance of the petitioner is against the attitude of the police officers of Dakshina Kannada and especially the S.I. of Police, Traffic (West) Mangalore who is respondent t in this petition. According to the petitioner, the. respondent 1 is in the habit of seizing stage carriage vehicles of the petitioner even though there is no violation of the provisions of S. 129-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The grievance appears to be more in the nature of a complaint against harassment and abuse of power than in the nature of ordinary grievance of irregularity in the exercise of power by public officials.2. The petitioner has produced two police notices which disclose the nature of offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner's driver and also showing that the vehicle was...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Canara Bank
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-10-1988
Reported in: [1989]175ITR601(KAR); [1989]175ITR601(Karn)
Hakeem, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as applied to the Interest-tax Act,1974, by section 21 therof, the Income-tax Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Triunal was right in holding that the contention of the assessee that the sum of Rs. 80,55,976 representing the rediscounting interest paid on bill did not accrue or arise to the assess-bank by reason of diversion of such discount through an overriding title in voavour of the Reserve Bank of India and the Industrial Development Bank of India and hence did not form part of the chargeable interest under the provisions of the Interest as Act, 1974 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the transaction between the assessee and the Industrial Development Bank...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »