Karnataka Court March 1990 Judgments
Shivanand Govind Nayak Vs. Vivekanand Shrikamal Patil
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-12-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR1252; 1990(1)KarLJ331
K.A. Swami, J. 1. This Writ Appeal is preferred against the order dated 22nd January 1990 passed in Writ Petition No. 1141/ 1990. The appellant was the petitioner in the Writ Petition. Respondents 1 to 3 herein were respondents 1 to 3 in the Writ Petition. In this Judgment, the parties are referred to with reference to the position assigned to them in the Writ Petition.2. In the Writ Petition, the petitioner sought for quashing the order dated 20th January 1989 passed by the 3rd respondent in No. RNT/CR/15/87-88 and also the order dated 5-12-1989 passed by the 2nd respondent in No. RNT/AP/SR/15/88-89 produced as Annexure-B and C respectively in the Writ Petition.3. The premises in question numbered as A-2 is situated in the Mission Compound, Hubli. There are two premises bearing No. A-1 and A-2 in the same Mission Compound, Hubli. Both the premises belong to respondent No. 1. The premises bearing No. A-1 was occupied by the petitioner as a tenant. The 1st respondent sought for eviction...
Tag this Judgment!G.M. Bhaskaracharya Vs. Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-12-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC492
Chandrakantharaj Urs., J.1. Petitioner while working for the government during the Dasara exhibition of 1982, suffered injuries while painting, what he has described as 'tabuloes'. (I could not find such a word in Concise Oxford Dictionary). He claims to be an artist and his allegation is that he has not been paid either the compensation for the injuries suffered by him while working or given the reward whatsoever for work he had done. In that circumstance, he has approached this court for the relief inter alia for a direction to the respondents to pay him compensation to the injuries sustained in the course of his employment while preparing tabuloes during the year 1982 Dasara Exhibition for the respondents.2. On his own admission, he claimed compensation under the provisions of the Works-man compensation Act before the commissioner appointed under the said Act. The commissioner dismissed the claim inter alia on the ground that there was no employer and employee relationship between t...
Tag this Judgment!Fifth Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Abdul Qadar Adam and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR2863; [1990]186ITR549(KAR); [1990]186ITR549(Karn)
M. Rama Jois, J. 1. These two writ appeals are presented by the Wealth-tax Officer aggrieved by the order of the learned single judge (see [1987] 168 ITR 420) allowing the writ petitions presented by the respondents and quashing notices issued under section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. 2. The brief and undisputed facts of the case are these : For the assessment year 1972-73, respondents who are co-owners having half share in the house property bearing premises No. 12, Millers Road, Bangalore, declared the total value of the building at Rs. 1,80,000 and the half share of each of them at Rs. 90,000. The whole of the area including the building was 5,775 sq. yards. The assessing authority did not accept the valuation furnished by the respondents. He fixed the value of the house property as on March 31, 1971, the date of valuation as follows : 'The value as on March 31, 1971, is fixed as follows : Rs.No. 12, Miller's Road property 5,775 sq.yards at Rs. 55 per sq. yard 3,17,625Cost...
Tag this Judgment!Divya Export Enterprises Vs. ProducIn Private Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-1990
Reported in: [1991]70CompCas760(Kar); ILR1990KAR1610
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. This is a petition under section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act', for short), seeking winding up of the respondent for its alleged inability to pay its debts. 2. The case of the petitioner as told in the petition is as follows: The petitioner is engaged, inter alia, in imports raw cashewnuts from foreign countries and processes them in cashew factories owned by it. In the course of its business, the proprietor of the petitioner got acquainted with one Romesh Kotecha. He claimed to be a representative of the respondent-company as a director and also of a company called Production Ltd., a company incorporated in the United Kingdom. Negotiations were held regarding the purchase of raw cashewnuts by the petitioner and, in July, 1987, it was agreed that 250 M. T. (plus or minus 10% at seller's options) of dry raw cashewnuts would be supplied to the petitioner. The salient terms and conditions of the contract were the following : The goods were to be...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjiva @ Sanjiva Bhandary Vs. Vasantha and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-09-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Kant86; ILR1990KAR1401; 1990(3)KarLJ311
1. This is the 15th defendant's appeal against the Judgment and Decree, dated 29th June, 1988 of the learned Civil Judge at Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada District, in O.S. No. 13/1976 on his file.2. The facts to this appeal may be stated briefly and they are as follows. The plaintiffs Vasantha, Jayanatha and Sumantha filed the said O.S. No. 13/1976 in the Court of the Civil Judge at Mangalore for partition of schedule-B and C properties said to belong to the undivided family of which their deceased grand-mother Parameshwari Hengsu was a member. They arrayed as many as 50 defendants of whom Sanjiva, the 15th defendant, appellant herein, Krishnappa and Shyama are also the grand children of the said Parameshwari Hengsu but by the daughter while the plaintiffs are the children of a predeceased son of the said Parameshwari Hengsu by name Narayan Bhandary. It has been stated that the suit schedule-B properties are mulgeni properties which fell to the share of the aforementioned Parameshwari He...
Tag this Judgment!Gurappa Hanamantappa Bijapur and Another Vs. the State
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-09-1990
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1653; ILR1990KAR1014
ORDER1. This is a petition under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code for short). It is directed against the Order dated November 9, 1988, made by the Special Judge (the Sessions Judge), Bijapur, in Special Case No. 3/86 on his file. 2. The record of the petition and the record and proceedings in Special Case No. 3/86 sent for from the Special Court are perused and examined. The learned counsel representing the petitioners and the learned State Public Prosecutor for the Respondent State are heard. 3. The facts of the case, material to dispose of the present petition, are these : Gurappa Hanamantappa Bijapur (Petitioner No. 1) is a Trader at Bagalkot. Irappa Virupaxappa Sindagi (Petitioner No. 2) was working at the material time as an employee, in the shop of petitioner No. 1. Petitioner No. 1 is given a licence as a Wholesale Dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Edible Oil Dealers Licensing Order, 1977 (the Order for short) made by the Government of Karnataka in e...
Tag this Judgment!Management, Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. Vs. K.V. Bank Employees Union and Ot ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-09-1990
Reported in: [1991(61)FLR556]; ILR1990KAR2244; 1991(4)KarLJ568; (1991)IILLJ254Kant
K.A. Swami, J.1. At the stage of admission the respondents are notified. Accordingly, they have put in appearance through their respective counsel. 2. As the appeal involves only one question, it is admitted and heard for final disposal. 3. This appeal is preferred against the order dated October 3, 1988 passed in Writ Petition No. 16789/1987. 4. The appellant was the second respondent in the writ petition. The first respondent was the petitioner. First respondent is Karur Vysya Bank Employees Union by its General Secretary. In the writ petition the union sought for quashing the order/endorsement dated June 30, 1987 bearing No. L-12011/17/86-D : IV(A) issued by the Government of India produced as Annexure-C. 4.1. In respect of the claim made by the employees of Karur Vysya Bank Employees Union for payment of higher percentage of bonus for the accounting year 1981, the Bank requested the Central Government to make a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act to the Centra...
Tag this Judgment!Nagaraju Vs. Mahalingappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-09-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR1515
ORDERK.A. Swami, J.1. Sri B. Rudra Gowda, learned Standing Counsel for the K.E.B. to appear for respondents-2 and 3.2. This Civil Revision Petition is preferred against the order dated 18th January 1990 passed in M.A. No. 66/ 1989 confirming the order dated 30-9-1989 passed in O.S. No. 322/1989 by the learned Munsiff, Gubbi.3. The petitioner in this C.R.P. is the 4th defendant; 1st respondent is the plaintiff & respondents 2 to 4 are the defendants 1 to 3 in the suit O.S.No.322/ 1989. In this order, the parties will be referred to as per the position they enjoy in the trial Court.4. The suit is one for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 3 from drawing the power line over the land of the plaintiff bearing S.No.48 of B. Kodihalli village of Gubbi Taluk in order to provide power supply to the Bore-well situated in the land of the 4th respondent. The defendants are resisting the suit. In that suit, the trial Court on the application-1.A. No. 1, filed by the plaintiff has ...
Tag this Judgment!P. Seshagiriyappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR1719
ORDERChandrakantara. Urs, J. 1. This matter coming up for further orders, it is taken up for final disposal in view of the fact that it is covered by a decision of the Supreme Court and also there is some degree of urgency for the petitioner to get the required caste certificate.Petitioner has averred that he belongs to the community known as 'Bhovi'. He has asserted that the said caste has been declared as Scheduled Caste by the Government of India by Act No. 108 of 1976 with effect from 27-7-1977. The above mentioned Act has been extended to the entire State of Karnataka. He has also asserted that throughout his educational career his school records show him and the members of his family to belong to Bhovi caste. He made an application to the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, Thirthahalli Taluk, Thirthahalli, Shimoga District of Karnataka State for grant of a caste certificate on behalf of his minor children viz., (1) Sukanya, aged about 16 years, (2) Suchitra, aged about 14 years and (3) Su...
Tag this Judgment!M.C. Gangegowda Vs. Gurumallayya
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-08-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR1744
ORDERRajendra Babu, J. 1. This is a petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India calling in question the correctness and validity of an order made in Election Miscellaneous No. 8/87 on the file of the Munsiff at Arasikere.2. The facts leading to this petition are as follows:The petitioner and respondents 1, 3 and 4 contested an election held on 20th of January 1987. The petitioner was declared to have been elected having secured the highest number of votes in the said election. That election was called 1n question by filing, a petition under Section 14 of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya Panchayats Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The basis on which that petition was filed was that the petitioner was holding an office of profit in Kalyadi Cooper Mines, which is a unit of Hutti Gold Mining Company Ltd. which is a public-sector undertaking of the State Government and he had incurred the disqual...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »