Karnataka Court June 1989 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.
B. N. Ramesh Vs. Town Municipality, Arsikere
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-14-1989
Reported in: 1989(3)KantLJ510; 1989(3)KarLJ510; 1989(3)KLJ510
CHANDRAKANTARAJ, J.( 1 ) THE petitioner claims to be a citizen of arsikere Town in Hassan District. He has challenged the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Director, Municipal Administration, government of Karnataka on the report submitted by the Deputy Commissioner, hassan, in an appeal filed under Section 306 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the Arsikere Town Muslim Jamath Committee inter alia on the ground that the Deputy commissioner had no jurisdiction to pass an order suspending the resolution of the Town municipal Council by which the licence earlier granted to construct a building on certain site which the Municipal Council had admitted to be wakf property belonging to the jamath Committee had been cancelled on re-examination of the matter. The Deputy commissioner came to the conclusion that the Jamath Committee had not established its title, therefore, the licence should be kept in abeyance. From the narration ...
A.H. Thimmappa Vs. T.H. Ramiah
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-13-1989
Reported in: ILR1989KAR2112; 1989(2)KarLJ148
ORDERK.A. Swami, J.1. Differing from the view expressed by a Division Bench of this Court in GOUDAPPAGOUDA THIMMAPPA GOUDA PATIL v. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, BAILHONGAL AND ANR. W.A. 1212 of 1979 DD 21-1-1980, the Division Bench consisting of Hon'ble the Chief Justice and K.S.B.J., has referred the following question to a larger Bench:'Whether the Taluka Executive Magistrate under the Karnataka Debt Relief Act, 1976, has competence to go beyond the tenor of the deed evidencing the transaction of sale and declare the transaction as one of mortgage?'Hence the matter is before us.2. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing on both sides.3. In W.A.No. 520/1985, the appellant sold the land bearing S.No. 18/2, measuring 4 acres one guntas of Goravankal village, Hosadurga Taluk, under a registered sale deed dated 9-8-1961 for a sum of Rs. 3,000/- to the respondents 2 and 3. On the coming into force of the Karnataka Debt Relief Act, t976 (hereinafter referred to as the '1976 Act') he f...
Puttakamaiah Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-09-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Kant79; ILR1990KAR1265; 1989(2)KarLJ521
ORDER1. The short point for consideration herein is tenability of proceedings held by the Tahasildar leading to the auction sale of certain properties that were the subject-matter of the decree of a Civil Court. The proceedings of the Tahasildar is at Annexure 'B' wherein he purported to put up the subject-matter of the decree of the Civil Court to an auction at which the bidders were the parties to the suit and was eventually knocked down by the successful bidder i.e., the 7th respondent. The petitioner is one of the parties to the auction sale. Being himself a judgment-debtor under the decree obtained by the 7(h respondent who is the plaintiff in the suit questioned the auction proceedings and the subsequent affirmance of the same by the Deputy Commissioner and finally by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal on appeal.2. The point raised herein is the competence of the Tahasildar to have taken the step of putting up the properties for auction as a step in aid to executing the decree that...
S. Ramesh and Etc. Vs. the Selection Committee for Admission to M.B.B. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-08-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Kant36; 1989(2)KarLJ192
ORDER1. Where a medical seat of Scheduled Tribe category out of the number of seats set apart for B.Sc. Group under Cl. (b) of sib-rule (2) of R.4 of the Karnataka Medical Colleges (Select ion of Candidates for Admission to First Year M.B.B.S. Course) Rules, 1988 (for short 'the Rules'), remains unfilled, has such seat to be filled up by a candidate of the same category seeking selection from seats set apart for P.U.C. Group under Cl. (a) of sub-rule (2) of R. 4 of the Rules, is the question which arises for consideration and decision in these writ petitions.2. S. Kamesh, petitioner in Writ Petition No. 15990/88, who has passed the B.Sc. Examination, had sought for a medical seat out of the seals of the first year M.B.B.S., Course in Government/Private Medical Colleges in Karnataka for the year 1988-89 available for Scheduled Castes in B.Sc. Group under the Rules. So also, Smt. G. P. Savithramma, petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2975/89, who has passed the P.U.C.Examination, had sought ...
V. Roja Srinivasalu Vs. Universal Finance Corporation and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-1989
Reported in: [1992]73CompCas403(Kar); ILR1990KAR1697
S. Rajendra Babu, J.1. This is a plaintiff's revision petition. She filed a suit on October 5, 1977, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,960 in the Court of the Munsiff which was later on transferred to the court of Small Causes, Bangalore. The case of the petitioner is that defendants Nos. 4 and 13 to 19 and the late Vardaraja Setty and Vishwanathaiah, who are the partners of the first defendant firm, obtained from her a sum of Rs. 3,000 by way of fixed deposit on October 6, 1970, under receipt No. 252 payable on the expiry of two years with interest at 15 per cent. per annum. At the end of two years, the defendant persuaded the plaintiff to renew the said deposit for a further period of two more years, but at the end of the said period, the defendants did not pay the principal and the interest due, except a sum of Rs. 620 each paid by defendants Nos. 15 and 19 leaving a balance of Rs. 4,910. The plaintiff-petitioner brought the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,960 which included the no...
V.Lakkanna (Since Deceased by His L.Rs.) and Others Vs. Land Acquisiti ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-06-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Kant192
ORDERRama Jois, J.1. This appeal is presented under S, 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Actagainst the judgment and award in landacquisition reference under S. 18 and S. 31(2)of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act forshort). 2. The facts of the case in brief are as follow :3 acres 9 guntas of land in Sy. No. 104 of Ulsoor village was purchased from the then Government of Mysore jointly by one Anjanappa and Puttanarasimha Setty for a consideration of Rs. 15.000/- on 9-6-1947. Prior to the purchase of the said property, for the purpose of purchasing the land, the said two persons had borrowed two sums of money from the appellant on promissory note. The amounts of money borrowed was Rs. 5,500/-and Rs. 7,000/- respectively. After the said purchase, there was an agreement between the said two persons, appellant and a few others' on 4-8-1948. According to the said agreement, the land in question was to be converted into sites and sold subject to the condition that the profits realised from the sa...
Ramkumar Mills P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-1989
Reported in: (1989)78CTR(Kar)141; [1989]180ITR464(KAR); [1989]180ITR464(Karn); 1989(2)KarLJ424
Rama Jois, J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The question of law referred for our opinion reads : 'Whether, for the purposes of section 22 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the ownership of property is transferred only by execution and registration of sale deed and not by other acts such as delivering vacant possession and giving all rights of interest in the property including the right of realisation of rent ?' 2. The relevant facts are these : The assessment year is 1978-79. The assessee, being the owner of certain industrial sheds at Ahmedabad, had leased them to one Y. G. Panduranga Setty and four others, from July 31, 1974, for a period of 98 years on an annual rent of Rs. 35,000. The assessee, with the consent of the lessee, entered into an agreement on September 1, 1975, with a partnership firms styled Lakshmi Commercial Corporation for the sale of the property for a consideration of...
Hind Art Press, Mangalore Vs. E.S.i. Corporation and anr. Overruled
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-1989
Reported in: I(1990)ACC127; [1989(59)FLR778]; ILR1989KAR2001; 1989(2)KarLJ227; (1990)IILLJ195Kant
Rama Jois, J.1. In these two appeals, presented under sub-section (2) of Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('the Act' for short), the following substantial questions of law arise for consideration : '(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent-Employees' State Insurance Corporation, was justified in imposing damages of fifty per cent., sixty per cent., and hundred per cent, of the amount of contribution required to be remitted by the appellant to the Corporation, in respect of which there was some delay by the appellant in remitting the same to the Corporation (2) Whether the first respondent-Employees' State Insurance Corporation, was justified in treating the special allowance, midday meal allowance and overtime wages as part of 'wages' for the purpose of computing the contribution payable under the provisions of the act and the Scheme framed thereunder ?' 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : By an order dated 12th Sept...
A.R. Badarinarayana Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-1989
Reported in: ILR1989KAR2016; 1989(2)KarLJ610
Rama Jois, J.1. In this appeal presented under Section 31(1) of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 ('the Act' for short), against the order, of the Special Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga, the following question of law arises for consideration:'Whether under Section 17(1) of the Act, an Inamdar is entitled to any compensation in respect of lands of which he is registered as an occupant and in respect of which tenants other than those falling under Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Act are continued as tenants under Section 9A of the Act.'2. In order to appreciate the question, it is necessary to make a brief survey of the provisions of the Act, as it stood on the date on which it was enacted and of the Amendment of the Act by Act No.7/56, by which Section 9A and Chapter III-A were inserted into the Act, before the date on which the Act was brought into force w.e.f. 1-2-1959. Salient aspects of these provisions are these:-(i) The Act was enacted by the Legislature o...
S. Harinatha Reddy Vs. Bangalore University
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-02-1989
Reported in: ILR1990KAR457; 1989(3)KarLJ25
ORDERBalakrishna, J. 1. The petitioner, who is a student of M.V.J. College of Engineering, Bangalore, affiliated to the Bangalore University, has sought a Mandamus to continue the studies of the petitioner in the remaining 3 year course of annual scheme of B.E. Degree Examination and also for quashing the impugned Memos dated 26-10-1987 besides the appended note in Annexures 'C' and 'D'.2. The material facts are as follows:The petitioner joined the I Year B.E. Annual Scheme course in Industrial Production for the year 1986-87 in the month of August, 1986. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared for the I Year Engineering Examination after an Admission Card was issued to the petitioner and he took the examination in all the papers. In September, 1987, the results of the examination were announced by the 1st respondent. However, the 2nd respondent notified the petitioner that his results would be announced later. On 26-10-1987, the petitioner received a communication by the 2nd respondent to...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »