Karnataka Court October 1990 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.
Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Krishna Dass
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)KarLJ363; (1999)IIILLJ246Kant
Ramachadriah, J.1. Petitioner was the complainant and respondents 1 to 3 were accused Nos. 1 to 3 respectively in C.S. No. 2010/1987 on the file of the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bangalore City, (for short 'the Special Court') C.C. No. 2010/1987 arose out of a private complaint filed by the petitioner Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') against the respondents (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') on November 30, 1987 alleging that the accused have violated the provisions of Sections 44 and 45(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') for which they are liable to be prosecuted for Commission of an offence under Clauses (f) and (g) of Section 5 of the Act for non-production of the documents mentioned against Sl. Nos. 1 to 8 of paragraph 7(b) of the complaint for scrutiny by the Inspector of the Corporation as called upon in the notices dated January 7, 1987, May 7, 1987 and August 20, 1987 issued to the accused after he vi...
Muniyamma and ors. Vs. Arathi Cine Enterprises P. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: [1992]74CompCas256(Kar); ILR1991KAR527
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. The petitioners seek rectification of the register of members of the first respondent company (referred to as 'the company'), with a declaration that the 21 persons named in the petition are members of the company with their respective shareholding as shown therein. It is stated in the petition that the nominal, issued, subscribed and paid-up capital of the company is Rs. 10 lakhs divided into 10,000 equity shares of Rs. 100 each. The main object of the company is to construct a theatre/cinema hall, business complex, auditorium and exhibit cinematograph films. The second respondent who owns lands in Sy. No. 68/4 and 68/5 of Nagasetty village (which is part of Bangalore city and the area is developing into a good residential locality and is known as Rajmahal Vilas Extension, II Stage) ; the second respondent obtained a 'no objection certificate' in the year 1978 to set up a cinema theatre and had the building plan sanctioned ; and to further his objectives, h...
Myageri Vs. Srinivasa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: ILR1991KAR1232
ORDERShivashankar Bhat, J.1. This Revision Petition is filed by the tenant against an order of eviction made under Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). For the sake of convenience the parties herein are referred with reference to their ranking in the trial Court -i.e., the landlord is referred as the petitioner and the tenant as the respondent.2. The respondent has been the tenant in respect of the schedule premises since about the year 1969. The petitioner is a hotelier by profession, who at present is residing in a portion of the building wherein he is carrying on the hotel business in partnership with his elder brother. According to the petitioner, even though the premises was constructed in the year 1969 he did not shift immediately because he was living with his mother in the hotel building. The petitioner further states that in the year 1976 the petitioner and his elder brother constructed another hotel building called 'Janardhana' whic...
State of Karnataka Vs. Firm Hotel Nagarjun
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: ILR1991KAR298
ORDERRamachandriah, J. 1. The short but interesting and important question which falls for determination in these two connected revision petitions filed by the State Government under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. against different but similar orders of the learned Special Judge, Gulbarga in Special Case Numbers 3/1988 and 51/1987 is:-Whether the Sessions Judge functioning as Special Court under Section 12A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') was justified in discharging the respondents-accused charge sheeted for the offence of the contravention of the provisions of certain Control Orders promulgated relating to essential commodities under Section 3 of the Act and made punishable under Section 7 of the Act on the sole ground that the Deputy Commissioner or the Assistant Commissioner had released the seized essential commodity to the accused under Section 6-A of the Act by holding that he had not violated any of the provisions of the control order and, therefore, ...
P.K. Upadhyaya Vs. A. Venkatesh
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR4060; 1990(3)KarLJ134
ORDERShivashankar Bhat, J.1. These petitions are by the tenants. All the respondents are the landlords, who filed several eviction petitions against the tenants under Section 21(1)(h) and (j) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 ('the Act'). For the sake of convenience the landlords are referred as the petitioners and the tenants as the respondents.2. The petitioners are brothers. According to them they desire to demolish the existing structure and put up a new structure in the area, covered by the respective schedule premises and also another part of the same area, which is already in their possession. In the eviction petitions it is stated that the petitioners require the premises to put up a construct ion and to run a lodging section. According to the petitioners, they intend to put up a multistoreyed building after the demolition of the existing structure and the requisite permission for the plan was being sought from the Corporation and the Corporation has sanctioned the plan a...
Mrs. Jacqueline Chandani Vs. Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-05-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Kant194; 1991CriLJ1408; 1991(32)ECC332
ORDER1. Action is brought by the petitioner for quashing the order under Annexure-G dated 27-12-1982 passed by the Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate, Madras (respondent-1) as well as the Notification issued by the Union of India (respon-dent-2) under Annexure-H dated 21-5-1979 published in Gazette of India Part-II dated 2-6-1979 besides a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from enforcing the provisions of Ss.8(1), 14 and 19(1)(e) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973.2. The material facts are that the petitioner is a citizen of United States of America (U.S.A.) by birth and origin holding an U.S. Pass Port. She was married in 1967 to one Jagdish Chandani of Indian origin when he was permanently residing in U.S.A. He shifted his residence from U.S.A. to India by the end of 1966. It was during his visit to U.S.A. in 1967 that the marriage took place.3. Before the marriage of the petitioner, she was residing with her parents in U.S.A. and her parents are citizen...
L.M. Rajappachetty and Bros. Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in K ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-05-1990
Reported in: [1991]81STC109(Kar)
M. Rama Jois, J. 1. In these two revision petitions presented under section 23(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1976 ('the Act' for short) by the same assessee, the following question of law arises for consideration : 'Whether herbs, roots and barks of trees could be regarded as medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations falling under entry 41 of the Second Schedule to the Act ?' 2. Brief facts of the case are these : The assessee is a dealer in dried herbs, roots and barks of various types of trees which are drugs used for curing certain types of diseases. The assessment years are 1979-80 and 1980-81. Before the assessing authority the plea of the petitioner was that the goods sold by the petitioner were general goods falling under sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Act attracting sales tax at the rate of 4 per cent. The assessing authority accepted the plea of the petitioner and assessed the petitioner to sales tax under the Act on that basis. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Comme...
Dr. S.C. Patil Vs. Karnataka University
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-05-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR3638; 1990(3)KarLJ108
ORDERMohan, C.J.1. All these Writ Petitions can be dealt with under common Judgment since the relief that is prayed for, is one and the same,2. The petitioners in W.Ps. Nos. 18167, 18168 and 18169 of 1985, Dr. S.C. Patil, Dr. S.M. Banakar and Dr. Vijaya Sangama Deva, are Assistant Surgeons in the State Medical Service who have put in over 5 years of service. Dr. M. Mahabaleshwar the petitioner in W.P. No. 18170 of 1985 is a Medical Officer in the Karnataka Power Corporation. He has also similarly put in over 5 years of service.AM these petitioners were admitted to the Post Graduate Medical Courses by the State Government-respondent-2 as in-service candidates. They were allotted to the Karnataka Medical College affiliated to the Karnataka University from out of the quota of 50 per cent seats reserved for Doctors serving in the Department of Medical Education and Health and Family Welfare Services and Government Corporations. The selection of the in-service candidates was made by the ord...
Mysore Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-05-1990
Reported in: 1991(32)ECC129
ORDERS.R. Rajasekhara Murthy, J.1. The petitioner is the Mysore Paper Mills Ltd., which who manufactures all varieties of writing and printing paper as also newsprint in its factory. Among the several types of paper manufactured by the petitioner Company, printing writing paper is exigible to levy under Central Excise Act under Item 17(3) of the Schedule at 60 Paise per Kgm. But the petitioner went on paying by mistake, at Rs. 1-20 Ps. per Kgm. under Item 17(2) of the Schedule. Items 17(2) and (3) are reproduced below for ready reference.________________________________________________________________________________Item No. Description of goods Rate of duty per kgm.________________________________________________________________________________2. Blotting, toilet, target tissue other than cigarette Rs. 1-20 per Kgm. tissue, teleprinter, typewriting, manifold, bank bond, art paper chrome paper, tub-sized paper, cheque paper, stamp paper, cartridge paper, waxed paper, polythelene coated...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›