Karnataka Court January 1990 Judgments
Mysore Sales Corporation Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Entry Tax, Asse ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-1990
Reported in: [1990]78STC185(Kar)
S.R. Rajasekhara Murthy, J.1. The petitioners in the first batch of cases are all dealers in household consumer durable items, such as sewing machines, electric fans, etc. The petitioners in the second batch of cases are all dealers in sewing machines and spare parts. 2. The petitioners have stated in the writ petitions that the sewing machines sold by them are meant for use as domestic appliances by house-wives and used by small time tailors. They have also further asserted that these sewing machines sold by them have no industrial application. All the petitioners are aggrieved by the show cause notices proposing to levy entry tax on sewing machines and treating them as 'industrial machinery' under entry 7 of the Schedule to the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use or Sale therein Act, 1979 ('the Act' for short). 3. The Act passed by the State Legislature as Karnataka Act No. 27 of 1979 was brought into force with effect from 1st October, 1980. The obj...
Tag this Judgment!H.G. Shivanandappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR2252
ORDERK.A. Swami, J. 1. The respondent has entered appearance through the learned Government Pleader Sri T.S. Mohammed Ali.2. As this petition can be disposed of on a short ground, it is admitted and heard for final disposal.3. This Civil Revision Petition is preferred against the order dated 30-8-1989 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sagar in Ex. Nil of 1988 arising out of L.A.C. No. 8 to 11/78-79.4. The case of the petitioner is that he owned a plot of land measuring 4 acres 23 guntas comprised in S.No. 11 of Chikkakoralahalli village. The said land was acquired by the State Government to expand the existing lake known as Anjanapura lake in Shikaripura Taluk. Pursuant to the acquisition, the Land Acquisition Officer, passed an award in L.A.C.Nos.8 to 11/78-79 determining a compensation of Rs. 20,052/- towards the value of the land, well etc. Notice of passing of the award was also issued to the petitioner. The further case of the petitioner is that as the amount was not deposited in...
Tag this Judgment!M.K. Chandappa Vs. the State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Kant203; 1990(2)KarLJ23
ORDER1. The petitioner is a resident of the City of Mangalore in Dakshina Kannada District. In this petition he has alleged that respondents 4, 5 and 6 who are police officers have been constantly threatening and invading his privacy and a few others destroy his property. He has submitted a petition to the 3rd respondent, Superintendent of Police, Dakshina Kannada District, a true copy of that petition is produced at Annexure-A to the petition. In that, he has done no more than inform the Superintendent of Police, the various transgressions committed by respondents 3, 4, 5 and 6. He has, therefore, asked the officers concerned to take appropriate action.2. He has further made a representation to the Governor of the State of Karnataka on 14-10-1989 complaining that no action has been taken against respondents 4, 5 and 6 the police officers are named and it is alleged, they are continuously causing harassment to the petitioner and the members of his family. Similarly, there is another re...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. Smt. Lakshmi and Anoth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ239; [1993]76CompCas600(Kar); ILR1990KAR573
Rama Jois, J.1. These two appeals are presented by the United India Insurance Company Limited against the same interim award made by the Motor Accidents claim Tribunal, Bangalore rural District. 2. They have come up for orders. By consent of both counsel, they are taken up for final hearing and are being disposed of by this order. 3. In these two appeals, the following important question of law arises for consideration, namely : 'whether the period of limitation of six months prescribed under sub- section (3) of section 110A of the Motor vehicles Act, 1939 (`the Act' for short), applies to an application claiming compensation based on no fault liability' under section 92A of the Act also?' 4. The brief facts of the case are these : The accident which gave rise to the claim petitions occurred on May 10,1988 Two claim petitions under section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ('the Act' for short)' claiming compensation for the death of the deceased person, who was the husband of the r...
Tag this Judgment!S.P. Subramanya Shetty Vs. Deputy Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR477; 1990(1)KarLJ185
ORDERMohan, C.J.1. The short facts leading to the Writ Petition are as follows:The petitioners constitute a Hindu Joint Family. They own inter alia properties in Sy.Nos. 93/1 and 93/2 of Kushal nagar Town, Kodagu District and therefore, all of them have joined together and filed this Writ Petition. These two Survey Numbers measure 4 and 7 cents respectively. 2. By a Notification made in No. LAQ.AC.9/81-82, dated July 6th, 1981 issued by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by Karnataka Act 17 of 1961, it was proposed to acquire these lands for a public purpose, namely, for formation of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation bus-stand at Kushal nagar.3. In and by that Notification, objections were invited to be preferred on or before 30th October, 1981. The Deputy Commissioner authorised the Assistant Commissioner, Mercara Sub-Division, to perform his functions. The Notice under Section 5-A(2) was served on 21-9-1981 on the first pe...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Lakshmi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-17-1990
Reported in: II(1990)ACC470
Rama Jois, J.1. These two appeals are presented by the United India Insurance Company Limited against the same interim award made by the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Bangalore Rural District.2. They have come up for orders. By consent of both the Counsel. they are taken up for final hearing and are being disposed of by this order.3. In these two appeals, the following important question of law arises for consideration, namely,Whether the period of limitation of six months prescribed under Sub-section (3) of Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ('the Act' for short) applies to an application claiming compensation based on 'no fault liability' under Section 92-A of the Act also? 4. Brief facts of the case are these:-The accident which gave rise to the claim petitions, occurred on 10th May, 1988. Two claim petitions under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ('the Act' for short) claiming compensation for the death of the deceased person, who was the husband of the r...
Tag this Judgment!Nayaz Ahmed Sheriff and Others Vs. Zahoor Ahmed Sheriff and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-15-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Kant348; ILR1990KAR807; 1990(1)KarLJ230
ORDER1. At the stage of admission respondents have entered appearance. Therefore, the petition is admitted and it is heard for final disposal.2. Respondents 1 to 3 are the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 45 of 1989 on the file of the learned Vacation District Judge, Hassan and respondents 4 and 5 are the defendants 7 and 8 respectively in the said suit. Petitioners are defendants 1 to 6 in the said suit. After the vacation the suit now stands transferred to the file of Munsiff, Hassan and it is numbered as O.S. No. 20 of 1990.3. This Civil Revision Petition is preferred against the Order dt. 30th Dec. 1989 passed by the learned Vacation District Judge, Hassan in O.S. No, 45 of 1989 (oldnumber) rejecting I.A. No. III filed by defendants 1 to 6 in the suit. Defendants I to 6 filed I.A. No. III under O. VII R. 11 of the Civil P.C. to reject the plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by Ss. 32 and 33 of the Arbitration Act 1940 and S. 14(2) of the Specific Relief Act 1963. Learned counsel for...
Tag this Judgment!Choudhary Nagappa Enterprises Vs. Karnataka Electricity Board
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-15-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR615
ORDERK.A. Swami, J. 1. At the stage of preliminary hearing, the respondents are notified. Accordingly, they have put in appearance through Sri Ashok R. Kalyana Shetty, Advocate and have filed statement of objections also.2. As this petition can be disposed of on a short ground, rule is issued and it is heard for final disposal.3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought for quashing the demand notice dated 7-11-1989 bearing No. AEEE.ESD.3: AA01:SAII: 759J-602 Assistant (Annexure-A) issued by the Assistant Executive Engineer (Electrical), K.E.B., E.S.D.3, Bangalore-1, In the impugned demand notice, the respondents have called upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.4,03,903-00 being the back-billing charges from June 1987 to October 1989.4. The contention of the petitioner is that the demand made by respondent-2 as per Annexure-A is hit by Section 26(6) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Therefore, it is li...
Tag this Judgment!P. Ramadas Nayak Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corporation and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-11-1990
Reported in: [1990]68CompCas479(Kar); 1990(1)KarLJ275
M.P. Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This matter is identical in the matter of questions of law as well as questions of fact with the case of Laxminarayana Tile Works (W.P. No. 21766 of 1989 disposed of by me on January 4, 1990) [1990] 67 Comp Cas 559 (Kar). 2. I have held therein that the plenary powers given to the respondent, the State Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') under section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), are wide enough to enter possession and assume management of the industrial concern as well as transfer the right in the machinery or building hypothecated or mortgaged to it and realise the debt due. Admittedly, the petitioner is a defaulter in the matter of repayment of the loan borrowed by him. Despite the show-case notice issued more than once, he has not repaid the amount in full. Therefore, the Corporation has exercised its power under section 29 of the Act and directed the auction ...
Tag this Judgment!Corporation of the City of Mangalore Vs. N.S. Giri
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-11-1990
Reported in: [1990(60)FLR590]; ILR1990KAR654; 1990(1)KarLJ236; (1991)ILLJ150Kant
Mohan, C.J.1. The facts leading to the Writ Appeal are as follows : N. S. Giri, respondent-1 herein, joined the services of appellant-1 Municipality as a Health Assistant in the year 1950. He was promoted as a Sanitary Inspector in the year 1962. There was a further promotion as a Selection Grade Sanitary Inspector on a substantive basis with effect from 1st June, 1967. Thereafter, the post was re-designated as Assistant Health Officer. 2. Originally the Mangalore City Municipality was constituted under the provisions of the then Madras District Municipalities Act (the Act, for short). As far as the service conditions and the age of retirement of Health Officers of the Health Department are concerned, they were governed by the Madras Public Health Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Under the said Rules, the retirement age of the servants of the Public Health Department was 60 years in some cases and in some other cases it was 58 years. There was also a provision in the said Rules for...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »