Karnataka Court August 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.
Srikanta Datta Narasimharaja Wadiyar Vs. Venkateswara Real Estate Ente ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-11-1988
Reported in: [1990]68CompCas216(Kar); ILR1989KAR2562; 1990(3)CLJ38(Karn)
Bopanna, J.1. A Preliminary objection is raised by the contesting respondents on the maintainability of the company petition under sections 397, 398 and 402 of the Companies Act, 1956 (in short, 'the Act), on the ground that the petitioner is not a member of the first respondent-company and that therefore, he cannot invoked the aforesaid provisions of the Act. A similar objection was raised in Company Petition No. 8 of 1982 by the contesting respondent in that petition and that was the subject-matter of Original Side Appeal No. 2 of 1985 before a Division Bench of this court in Shri Balaji Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Ashok Kavle [1989] 66 Comp Cas 654 to which was a party. The Division Bench had ruled that if a person was admittedly treated as a member of the company and satisfied the company court that he is a shareholder of a company by virtue of allotment of shares in his favour which is evidence not only in the register of other document maintained and filed by the company, it is no...
Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Other
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-11-1988
Reported in: [1991]70CompCas440(Kar)
Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. These writ petitions were referred to a Division Bench by a learned single judge of this court. The petitions are filed by Indian Aluminium Company Ltd. (referred hereinafter as 'the petitioner') and one of its shareholders. The substance of the several reliefs sought is to restrain the enforcement of the revised rates of electricity tax with effect from August 18, 1991, and/or for a direction to the first respondent to reimburse to the petitioner the amounts paid which are in excess of the rate of 3% of the invoice amount s specified in clause 6(c) of the agreement between the parties. The other prayers are all incidental or ancillary to the basic relief sought by the petitioner. 2. The plea of the petitioner is as follows : In the year 1966, the Government of Mysore had undertaken the Sharavathi Valley Hydro Electric Project in the State and had plans for the construction of a hydro electric generating system to generate a large quantity of electric power. At...
Kalyani Vs. Superintending Engineer
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-11-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR2855; (1989)ILLJ245Kant
ORDER1. In this petition presented by the petitioner, the Cashier, in the service of the Karnataka Electricity Board, the following question of law arises for consideration : Whether the Karnataka Electricity Board has no jurisdiction to hold departmental inquiry against the petitioner as a criminal proceeding is also pending against the petitioner before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bagalkot, in respect of some of the charges which also constitute the subjects matter of departmental inquiry ?2. The petition has come up for preliminary hearing after notice to the respondents. By consent of both the Counsel it is taken up for final hearing and is disposed of by this order. 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : On 25th July 1987 the Articles of charges framed against the petitioner by respondent No. 1, who is Specially Empowered Authority, was served on the petitioner. The three charges framed against the petitioner are : (1) That you Sri. R. N. Kalyani, while working as...
Mariyappa Narasappa Halavagala Vs. Chief Secretary
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-11-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR2675
Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. In these appeals the questions pertain to the interpretation and validity of the Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1987 (referred as 'the Act' hereinafter).2. All the appellants were elected to the respective Mandal Panchayats in the elections held in January 1987. The Mandal Panchayats are constituted under the provisions of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya Panchayats Act, 1983 (for short 'Z.P. Act'). The members so elected have to elect Pradhans and Up-Pradhans to the respective Mandal Panchayats under Section 42 of the Z.P. Act.3. Prior to the Act, and before the elections of the Members, the Governor had promulgated an Ordinance called, 'Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Ordinance, 1986 - (for short 'the Ordinance'). The provisions of the Act and the Ordinance, are substantially similar. The Ordinance came into effect on 29-12-1986.4. The main attack against th...
Bharath Gold Mines Ltd. Vs. Kannappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-11-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR3092; 1988(3)KarLJ327
Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. This appeal is by the Writ Petitioners, against the dismissal of their Writ Petition. The 1st appellant is referred as the appellant-company hereinafter, for the sake of convenience.2. The question raised pertains to the applicability of the provisions governing fixation of fair rent under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (for short, referred as the 'R.C. Act'), to the premises leased by the appellant-company to the 1st respondent.3. Appellant-company is a company registered under Indian Companies Act and its entire share capital is owned by the Government of India. It has in possession vast extent of mining area obtained by it on mining tease from the State Government. In some of the areas it has put up structures, which have been granted by it on lease to persons like the 1st respondent. Here, the subject-matter of lease is stated, originally to be a Tailor-shop, converted into a flour-mill, though, the first respondent asserts the same to be a 'building-c...
Bangalore University Vs. Kumari Rita
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-11-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR2633
Prem Chand Jain, C.J.1. Bangalore University, Jnana Bharathi, through its Registrar, has filed this appeal against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court dated November 28, 1984, by which W.P.No. 13507 of 1984 filed by Ku. P.B. Rita (hereinafter referred to as the Writ Petitioner) has been allowed and the words 'provided they have submitted the applications for the examinations along with the required fees in Regulation X(2)for the B.A., B.Com., and B.Sc., Degree Courses of the Bangalore University are declared invalid as offending Article 14 of the Constitution. A further Writ of Mandamus was issued to the Bangalore University to permit the Writ Petitioner to keep term for the III year Degree Course during the current academic year.2. In order to appreciate the controversy certain salient features of the case may be noticed : The Writ Petitioner joined St. Joseph's College, Bangalore for B.A. Degree Course during the academic year 1982-83. She completed the I Year Degree ...
Anjanamma Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-11-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR3340
ORDERPatil, J.1. By this interlocutory application made under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant respondent-2 in Cr.R.P.No. 690/87, finally disposed of by the order dated 8-1-1988, has sought to recall the said order, to restore the revision & to rehear on merits.2. The application is pressed on the ground that although the applicant had engaged a Counsel, but by mistake of the office the power was mislaid in the office and he was shown as unrepresented and had no opportunity of being heard in the matter. The application is stoutly opposed by the otherside, who had filed the revision and has succeeded in getting reversed the order made in favour of the applicant.3. The order under challenge in the revision was regarding disposal of property (gold ingot said to be now worth Rs.24,000/-) in a criminal case which had ended in acquittal. The Magistrate had directed to return the same to the applicant and the Sessions Judge had confirmed that order and by the order...
Jayaram Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-10-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR3046; 1988(3)KarLJ523
ORDERBalakrishna, J.1. This is a Writ Petition filed by a deaf and dumb person who unfortunately met with an accident on 6-3-1987 when the petitioner was passing by the side of Bangalore Kunigal Road near Kenkere village limits and was knocked down by a car bearing Reg.No. MEY 8289. The petitioner submits that it was a case of hit and run caused by rash and negligent driving of the car. The petitioner sustained serious injuries inclusive of fracture of pelvis; besides other injuries and was admitted to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital, Jayanagar, Bangalore on the very same day and was treated in that hospital as in patient. After the accident, the father of the petitioner went to Tilaknagar Police Station, Bangalore at the instance of the hospital authorities and lodged a complaint which was subsequently transmitted by the police to the jurisdiction police station that is, to Kunigal Police who ultimately registered the case in F.I.R. 84/87.2. After discharge from the hospital, the father of the...
D.K. Kulur Vs. Indian Drugs
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-09-1988
Reported in: ILR1988KAR2293; 1988(2)KarLJ276
ORDERRama Jois, J.1. In this application the following question arises for consideration :Whether an interlocutory application in any case before this Court made by a party/applicant, can be numbered and posted before the Court if a certificate of posting for having sent the application by post to the Advocate appearing for the opposite party is produced along with the application?2. The facts and circumstances in which the question arises for consideration are these : This is an interlocutory application filed by the petitioner seeking an interim direction against the respondents. It has been numbered and posted for orders. Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the application could not have been numbered and posted for orders before this Court, as copy of the application had not been served on him. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that he had sent a copy of the application to the Advocate for the respondent by post under Certificate of Posting. Learned Co...
Hanmant Subbaji Joshi Vs. Ganesh Ramachandra Mujumdar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-08-1988
Reported in: ILR1989KAR1890; 1989(3)KarLJ57
Chandrakantaraj Urs, J 1. This is a Judgment-debtor's Revision against the Order of the Munsiff, Haveri in Execution Case No. 31/86.2. The facts are these:-On 27-8-1968, a compromise decree was passed in Miscellaneous Case 8/65 on the file of the Munsiff at Haveri. By terms of the decree, a site measuring 45'x75', which was in the occupation of the respondents in the said proceedings was to be vacated by respondents and vacant possession delivered on 25-7-1986 to the petitioner. In other words, the terms of the compromise were such that the bona fide requirement of the landlord stood postponed by eighteen years on account of, obviously, the inducement offered by the tenant-respondent. When the decree was sought to be executed after the lapse of the required time, the same has been resisted on the ground that the decree is a nullity inasmuch as the grounds urged by the landlord for seeking possession had disappeared by the very act of compromise and therefore, the decree by consent was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »