Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR1233
ORDERShyamasundar, J.1. The on-going dispute herein is between villagers and grantees of lands in few survey numbers of the village in question aggregating in all 30 acres distributed among the various grantees at 3 acres per head.2. The villagers successfully assailed these grants firstly before the Assistant Commissioner and thereafter on appeal by the grantees before the Deputy Commissioner, both of whom set aside the grants made to the grantees in the year 1972 and ultimately by the order of the Deputy Commissioner made in the year 1976 as per Annexure 'G' the grantees finally lost the grants on the ground that the land used for grants being the village gomal land, if large chunks of it was given away the village cattle will suffer since they were already under nourished because the extent of gomal available was far below the needs of the village cattle in that they exceed 1000 and odd heads as seen from the orders of Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner at Annexures D an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR796
ORDERBalakrishna, J.1. The petitioner applied for permission to start a Kannada Medium High School on 9-12-1987. Despite repeated representations, no decision was taken by the Competent Authority. For the second time, on 26-12-1988, the petitioner preferred another application for the same purpose. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is sign of response from the Competent Authority despite the passage of an inordinate length of time and the petitioner is put to unnecessary loss of investment though it has deposited the required money for consideration of its application.2. It is seen in a number of cases that the processing, consideration and disposal of applications for grant of permission to a number of Educational Institutions similarly situated has not been taken for considerably long periods without any justification. Inordinate delay has become the order of the day and the authorities seem to be immune to the needs of the community. Such an attitude is not only injuriou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR376; 1990(3)KarLJ499
ORDERRamachandraiah, J.1. These two criminal revision petitions filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, are disposed of by a common order at the Admission stage itself as agreed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned State Public Prosecutor as they involve same facts and points of law for consideration.2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kolar Gold Fields (K.G.F) seized from the residential house of one Sri V, Ramaswamy, who is the husband of petitioner Smt. Shamaladevi in Criminal Revision Petition No. 417/1989 and from the premises of Kamadenu Stores, Vijayanagar, K.G.F. which was in the occupation of one Sri D. Soundararajalu, who is the husband of petitioner Smt. S. Sukanya, also called as Suganya & Suguna in Criminal Revision Petition No. 418/1989 sufficiently huge quantity of fire works and sparklers estimated to be of the value of Rs. 1,06,851/- and Rs. 74,738/- respectively on the ground that the said two persons had no licenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR1038; 1990(3)KarLJ201
ORDERK.A. Swami, J.1. The respondents are represented. Though these petitions are posted in the category of preliminary hearing, Rule issued and the same are heard for final disposal.2. In these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:-'Wherefore the petitioners pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to undertake the execution work including the stringing of electrical wire for laying 220 K.V.A. line from Davanagere to Hiriyur in so far as it relates to the execution of work over the lands belonging to the petitioners are concerned and pass such other order as the Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.'3. The grievance of the petitioners is that the first petitioner is the owner in occupation of land measuring 17-15 acres comprised in Survey No. 149 of G.R. Hally, Chitradurga Taluk and the seco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR674
Hiremath, J. 1. The undisputed facts are that a tempo vehicle bearing registration No. CAA 3842 was purchased by the plaintiff-appellant under a hire purchase agreement with respondent No. 1, Canara Bank, having taken a loan of Rs. 56,000. The said loan with interest thereon was discharged by the time the suit came to be filed and the plaintiff, according to the bank, still owed Rs. 3,694.90 towards seizure charges, ground rent charges and other expenses. The said vehicle was seized on November 26, 1988, by respondent No. 1-bank towards realisation of the amount due to it under the hire-purchase agreement. The plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for a declaration that the seizure of the vehicle was without jurisdiction, void and for consequential orders for redelivery of the vehicle and further consequential orders under section 20 of the Hire Purchase Act, 1972, being enforced. 2. It is undisputed that, during the pendency of the suit, the entire loan as aforesaid due under the hire purc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR425
S.R. Rajasekhara Murthy, J.1. In these writ petitions the petitioners who are dealers registered under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, have challenged the validity of the amendment to section 22 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act by the Karnataka Act No. 15 of 1988. The amendment, taking away the power of the Appellate Tribunal to grant stay of payment of tax or penalty or any other amount payable, during the pendency of the appeals filed against any order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (A.C.) or the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (D.C.) under section 20 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, impugned in these writ petitions as inserted by Act No. 15 of 1988, is reproduced below : 'Section 22(3A). Notwithstanding that an appeal has been preferred under sub-section (1), the payment of tax or penalty or any other amount, payable, in accordance with any order passed by the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner und...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1990Kant205
ORDER1. The acceptance of the tender of and entrustment of the works pertaining to station building and miscellaneous works to, the 4th respondent, by the 2nd respondent (referred as 'the Corporation') is under challenge in this writ petition. The construction to be put up under the impugned contract is staled to be of Station Building and Miscellaneous Works such as providing panel walls, false-ceiling, insulation works, etc., for Unit-III, which is a component of the Raichur Thermal Power Station Stage-II, with an installed capacity of 210 MW.2. According to the 2nd respondent, the draft tender specifications for the works were formulated by M/s. Tata Consulting Engineers, who were the consulting engineers by the second respondent. These were scrutinised by the Chief Engineer (Civil Designs) of the 2nd respondent Corporation and with his note, were, further considered by the Civil Committee of the Corporation. The brief tender notification dated 27-12-1988 was thereafter issued by th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1991(34)LC234(Karnataka)
ORDERS.R. Rajasekhara Murthy, J.1. The petitioner-company is a manufacturer of patent or proprietary medicines at its factory in Bangalore. Among the several products the petitioner manufactures Salbutamol Sulphate--(hereinafter referred to as 'SS') and also produces Benzyl Methyl Salicylate ('BMS'), which is an input which goes into the manufacture of the 'bulk-drug' salbutamol sulphate. 'BMS' manufactured by the petitioner-company is consumed in entirety in the manufacture of the said bulk-drug. It is also stated in the petition that 'BMS', which is a bulk drug intermediate is not used in the manufacture of any other drug and is used exclusively for the manufacture of 'salbutamol sulphate'. It is also the case of the petitioner that 'BMS' is not sold in the market either by the petitioner-company or any other company.2. In the classification list filed by the petitioner-company during the years 1986-87, as per Annexures-B and B1, 'BMS' was shown in Col. 2 among 'other organic chemica...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1989KAR3492; 1990(1)KarLJ116
ORDERRama Jois, Ag. C.J. 1. In this appeal, the following question of law arises for consideration:-'Whether a Tahsildar who by virtue of Sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, (hereinafter referred to as the KLR Act), is deemed to be an Assistant Commissioner of the Revenue Sub-Division concerned, has the power to convene a meeting of the Mandal Panchayat for moving a vote of no confidence in the Pradhan, under Sub-section (3) of Section 47 of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya Panchayats Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the ZP Act)?'2. Though this appeal is posted for orders, by consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties it is taken up for final hearing.3. The facts of the case, in brief, are these:-Respondent-1 was the elected Pradhan of the Kakol Mandal Panchayat, Kakol, Ranebennur Taluk, established under the ZP Act. The Members of the said Mandal Panchayat gave a notice of 'No Con...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR1089; 1990(1)KarLJ93
ORDERRajasekhara Murthy, J. 1. The Writ Petition which is posted for preliminary hearing is taken up for final disposal by consent of both sides.2. The petitioner was the highest bidder in an auction held by the 4th respondent-Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kolar Sub-Division, Kolar for recovery of certain amounts due under an award obtained by the 5th respondent-Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Land Development Bank Ltd., Srinivasapur against one Venkatappa under the Co-operative Societies Act.3. Survey No. 17 of Neelatoor Village which was sold in the said auction was a 'granted land' under the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the SC/ST Act). The said Venkatappa mortgaged the said land in favour of the 5th respondent as security for a loan advanced by the Bank.4. After the sale was confirmed, the sale certificate dated 29-10-1987 was Issued as per Ann...
Tag this Judgment!