Karnataka Court July 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.
Manick Enterprises Vs. Haji Sulaiman
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-29-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR1078; 1988(2)KarLJ216
ORDERChandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This matter coming up for orders on I.A.1, is disposed of finally after hearing the Counsel for the parties.2. The Revision petitioner suffered an ex parte order of eviction in a proceeding for eviction instituted under the Karnataka Rent Control Act by the respondent. He filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 for setting aside that ex parte decree in a Miscellaneous Petition. That Miscellaneous Petition itself came to be dismissed for non-prosecution subsequently. Thereafter the respondent-landlord executed the order of eviction he had obtained and took possession of the building. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had filed one more Miscellaneous Application to set aside the order passed in the earlier Miscellaneous Petition. That has come to be dismissed on the ground, it is no longer maintainable in view of the execution proceedings being completed to execute the order made under Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act.3. Therefore, the short q...
Gouri vs. N.K.D.P.S.T.C.C.S. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-28-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR1045; 1988(3)KarLJ352
ORDERChandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This revision petition Is by the legal representative of Judgment-debtor No. 2 in Execution Case No. 5 of 1975 on the file of the Civil Judge at Karwar. The decree-holder is the North Kanara District Primary School Teachers Co-operative Credit Society Limited.2. By I.A.5, the decree-holder Co-operative Society sought the execution of the award passed in ABN No. 131 of 1969 dated 26-9-1970 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Karwar, who also Issued a certificate that the said decree had not been satisfied. The decree-holder sought attachment of properties of Judgment-debtor No. 2, which consisted of a house and certain agricultural lands in respect of which occupancy rights had been conferred on the deceased husband of the present revision petitioner.3. Objections were raised- by the Judgment-debtors on the ground that the attachment could not be made as the properties in question were tenancy properties and also Joint family properti...
Ferro Concrete Co. of India (Steels) Vs. the State of Karnataka and an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1988
Reported in: [1989]72STC230(Kar)
ORDERS.R. Rajasekhara Murthy, J.1. These writ petitions are directed against the orders of assessment passed by the second respondent for the years ending 30th June, 1973 to 30th June, 1978. The assessments have been completed during April, 1988 after the cases were remanded by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals) by his common order dated 13th December, 1984. The appeals preferred by the petitioner against the said order of the Deputy Commissioner were also dismissed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal on 22nd May, 1986. 2. There were two rounds of appeals from the orders of the assessment made for these six years. The assessee has failed in both the rounds before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and before the Appellate Tribunal. The assessment orders now impugned in these writ petitions were completed pursuant to the order of remand by the Deputy Commissioner in the second round of appeals. 3. Normally, this Court would not interfere with an order of assessment mad...
Balasaheb Venkatesh Khasbag @ Kulkarni Vs. Land Tribunal
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR2326
Shivashankar Bhat, J.Petitioner in W.P.No. 4474/1978 is the appellant in W.A.No. 2707/1985 - (he is referred as the petitioner hereinafter). Petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the order of the Land Tribunal conferring occupancy rights in favour of respondents 3 to 5 under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (the Act' for short) and hence this appeal.2. Respondent-5 was held to be the tenant of Sy.No. 16 (1 acre 9 guntas) and respondents 3 and 4 were held to be tenants of Sy.No. 48 (5 acres 10 guntas) of Khasbhag village, Belgaum Taluk by the Land Tribunal and consequently, they were ordered to be registered as occupants under Section 48-A of the Act. The order was challenged mainly on the ground that the area comprising the lands in question came within the purview of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Ceiling Act', for short); therefore, the Act ceased to be applicable.3. The Land Tribunal and the learned Single Judg...
Anthony Swamy Vs. Chowramma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-26-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR1294
ORDERVenkatachala, J.1. Court fee liable to be paid in this appeal by the appellants, arises for our decision.2. The appellants here had filed a petition, P & SC No. 1/1984, in the Court of District Judge at Hassan ('the District Court'), impleading the respondent here as the respondent therein. That was a petition for grant of probate or letters of administration with the Will annexed purporting to have been filed under Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 ('the Act'), while it has to be regarded as a petition filed under Section 276 of the Act. The respondent in that petition contested the grant of prayer therein by filing his statement of objections thereto. Because of the contest (contention), the District Court treated the petition as a contentions case and decided it conforming to the requirement of Section 295 of the Act, which reads:'295. Procedure in contentious cases -In any case before the District Judge in which there is contention, the proceedings shall take, as ...
Suryanarayana Setty Vs. Special Deputy Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-22-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR2907
ORDERMurlidher Rao, J.1. The petitioners who are in possession of premises bearing Door Nos.208 to 211 and 217 to 222, Raja Market, Avenue Road, Bangalore-2, have filed these two Writ Petitions, challenging the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner. Bangalore, in H.R.C. (City) A.No. 117/84-85 and 118/84-85.2. The premises belonged to late Raja Venkatachalapathy and R.V. Govindarajulu. They were leased to Nirmal Kala's Kisenchand Chellaram, under a registered lease deed dated 20-12-1964, by Raja Venkatarama Setty. The said lease was for 10 years. Thereafter, the third respondent - Nagarathnamma wife of Raja Venkatarama Setty and her two sons entered into a fresh lease on 3-1-1976, in favour of the aforesaid lessee for a period of 20 years with option to the lessee to renew the same. Petitioners case is that they have purchased the textile business run by Nirmal Kala's Kisenchand Chellaram, under sale deed dated 13-10-1983, and they have been in occupation of the premises.3. Th...
B. Kariyappa Vs. Land Tribunal
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-21-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR671; 1988(3)KarLJ365
ORDERK.A. Swami, J.1. In these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have sought for a declaration that the endorsement dated 3rd March 1988 bearing No.B.S.Appln.67/88 issued by the Circle Inspector of Police, Bhadravathi (Annexure-C) is illegal and without jurisdiction.2. By the aforesaid impugned endorsement, the Circle Inspector, Bhadravathi has directed the petitioners not to enter upon the land bearing S.No. 91 measuring 2 acres 34 guntas of Koppa Village as the Land Tribunal has recorded a finding in favour of respondent-3 while rejecting the application filed in Form No. 7 by the petitioners and his possession is also supported by the entries in Record of Rights. The endorsement is as follows:3. It is urged on behalf of the petitioners that the order dated 15-9-1987 passed by the Land Tribunal, Bhadravathi in No.KLR.MA 2582/74-5, 255/71-5 and INA.32/83-84 (Annexure-B) rejecting the application filed by the petitioners in Form No. 7 is challeng...
Munilakshmamma Vs. Deputy Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-21-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR2814; 1988(2)KarLJ209
ORDERBalakrishna, J.1. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that he desires to give up the IInd Respondent for the reasons that in this Writ Petition what he has challenged is only an order of refusal by the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, Kolar, who is an Appellate Authority to grant an order of interim stay, pending disposal of the appeal. Permission is granted. The petitioner is directed to amend the cause title by deleting the name of Respondent No. 2.2. In this Writ Petition the grievance of the petitioner is that the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, Kolar had refused to grant an order of stay pending disposal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, in case No. RA.SC/ST. 12/88-89. It is further submitted that in the said order (vide Annexure-A) the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, has not even assigned any reasons for having rejected the application for grant of stay pending disposal of the appeal. In the absence of an order...
State Vs. Abdul Razak Mohamed Saheb
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-20-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR3175; 1988(2)KarLJ453
ORDERPatil, J.1. The Special Judge, Belgaum by his order dated 24-8-1987, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 167(5) Cr.P.C. read with Section 12AA(c) of the Essential Commodities Act (for short 'the Act'), following decision of this Court in ISWARAPPA MAGUNDAPPA ARIBENCHI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA, : ILR1987KAR676 having directed to stop further investigation, on failure to conclude the investigation within six months, the State has come up in this revision questioning the legality and correctness of the order so passed by the Special Judge.2. Although it would appear, the Police had submitted a charge-sheet, but after the lapse of 6 months, and without any request for extending the time for completing the investigation till the date of the submission of the charge-sheet.3. Mr. C.H. Jadhav, learned Government Pleader appearing for the State relied upon a decision of this Court in GADAG CO-OPERATIVE TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED v. STATE OF KARNATAKA, : ILR1988KAR1489 and submitted t...
Sarabheshwara Vidya Peetha Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-20-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR3182; 1988(3)KarLJ415
ORDERBopanna, J.1. In these petitions the petitioners have sought for a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant affiliation to the College of Education (B.Ed. College) for the academic year 1987-88. They have also sought for a Writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order of the State Government bearing No-ED. 122 UBC 87 dated 1-9-1987 produced as Annexure-G 1 in Writ Petition No. 18111 of 1987. Since a common point arises for consideration in these petitions, they are disposed of by a common order.2. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 13227 of 1987 in an educational institution registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 and it is not in dispute that this Association is a minority institution which enjoys the protection of Article 40 of the Constitution. It is also not in dispute that this Association is running a number of educational institutions for catering to the needs of persons belonging to the minority community, namely,...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »