Karnataka Court July 1990 Judgments
M.G. Kadali Vs. A. Krishna
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR3446; 1982(2)KarLJ453
Ramachandriah, J. 1. These three appeals are filed by defendants-3, 1 and 2 respectively in O.S. 10600/1989 on the file of the XVIII Additional City Civil Judge, Mayohall, Bangalore City, against the Judgment and decree dated 19-4-1990 decreeing the suit declaring that the plaintiff's nomination paper to the Bangalore Turf Club Ltd. for the election of the office of Stewards held on 27-9-1989 had been improperly rejected by the Management of the Bangalore Turf Club Ltd., although his nomination was valid and proper; directing the club to accept the nomination paper of the plaintiff for the post of Stewards and to conduct fresh election in respect of the same by issuing fresh calendar of events and further declaring that the election of defendants-2 to 4 as Stewards for a period of two years from 27-9-1989 in the election held on that date is illegal and unsustainable in law and consequently, restraining defendants-2 to 4 by means of a perpetual injunction from acting, functioning or pa...
Tag this Judgment!The Chief Engineer Constructions, Southern Railway and ors. Vs. Hanuma ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-27-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC227
M.P. Chandrakantaraj Urs., J.1. These 2 appeals are disposed of by the common order as they are directed against the common judgment rendered in M.V.C. Nos. 243 and 244 of 1986 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Banglore Rural, Bangalore.2. First appeal is directed against the judgment in M.V.C. No. 343/86 in which the one Hanumanthappa was the claimant. In the other case M.V.C. 244/86 petitioner was the dependent i.e. wife of deceased Jayaram. Hanumanthappa suffered injuries and Jayaram died in an accident which took place when a lorry owned by the appellant-Southern Railways, bearing registration No. MYA 4789, dashed against them near Basettiahalli Spinning Mills at Doddaballapura. The lorry which bore registration No. MYA 4789 was undisputedly owned by the appellant-Southern Railways. The injured Hanumanthappa was an agricultural labourer or a coolie while the deceased Jayaram was an agriculturist and it was claimed by the widow that her husband was earning Rs. 5,00...
Tag this Judgment!Eramma and Another Vs. B.M. Basappa and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-26-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Kant57; 1991(1)KarLJ167
ORDERChandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This is a claimants' appeal against the award made by the learned district Judge Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chitradurga, in M.V.C. No. 612/86 2. The award is dated 18-8-89. The claimants filed the petition under S. 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation for the death of one Erappa, husband of first appellant herein and father of the second appellant who was second petitioner before the tribunal. They alleged that the deceased was involved in a motor vehicle accident which took place in Malebennur-Harihar road on 4-2-86.3. Erappa was working as a Hamali under the second respondent Sri Maralusiddeswara Rice Mill -- a partnership concern. That firm owned a lorry bearing registration No. MYS 7201. The first respondent -- the driver of the lorry -- on that day drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner on Malebennur-Harihar road with the result that the lorry capsized. Erappa and another sustained injuries. Erappa was admitted to C.G....
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Lalitha Ubhayakar and Another Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-26-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Kant186; 1990(3)KarLJ589
ORDER1. In these writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of Sec. 8 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It appears, the wife, the first petitioner who is a married lady, with her husband living, wants to adopt a child at Mathruchaya Foundling Home, a Charity Hospital and an old age home,'It is the 2nd petitioner. She was informed by the 2nd petitioner that unless her husband gives his consent, they could not give a child in adoption to her. Even according to her own averments in para 3 of the petition which reads as follows :'3. Petitioner No. 1 hails from a very famous family with a cultural and musical heritage. She is a famous musician of both national and inter-national repute. She is a specialist of Hindustani Classical Music. She has visited Russia and other European Countries, as a Member of the Cultural Delegation in the 1970's. She is regular participant in programmes of All India Radio, and ...
Tag this Judgment!Jeevaraj and anr. Vs. Collector of Customs and Central Excise and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-26-1990
Reported in: 1993(46)LC508(Karnataka)
ORDER1. W.A. Nos. 2011 and 2012 of 1984 are directed against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court partly allowing the writ petition filed by the appellants herein. The learned single Judge however did not grant the relief prayed for by the appellants that the order of confiscation be quashed.2. It was contended before the learned single Judge that in view of the provisions of Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, if the show cause notice contemplated by Section 124 was not given to the appellants within the period of six months from the date of the seizure of the goods, not only the goods should be returned to the appellants but the proceeding itself must come to an end. Emphasis was placed on proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 110. The learned single Judge took the view that where a valid notice under Section 110 was not served upon the petitioner, it only amounted to this that the petitioners became entitled to the return of goods seized from their possession. Fa...
Tag this Judgment!Siddappa Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-25-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ458; 1990(2)KarLJ242
1. The appellant herein was convicted by the Sessions Court at Raichur of under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life for committing the murder of his wife in the mid-night on 21-8-1986 on the katte in front of their house at Aidabhavi village in Raichur District by assaulting her with an axe. The case depended solely on the circumstantial evidence, the circumstances being the accused and the deceased sleeping on the katte that night, the deceased crying aloud at midnight time on sustaining severe injuries, and the accused being seen running from that place away and then he approaching the Dalapathi of the village and making confession before him and thereafter the Dalapathi taking the accused to the Police Station at Lingasugur and producing him in the police Station and the axe and in the clothes stained with blood being seized at the Police Station and the PSI having arrived at the spot on receipt of the report of the Dalapathi. The P.S.I. after seizing th...
Tag this Judgment!S. Gundappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-25-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR2764; 1990(2)KarLJ144
Mohan, C.J. 1. The appellants were recruited as Lecturers in the various Colleges. They are holders of III Class Master's Degree in the respective subjects. They had served for a period of more than three years as teachers; as such they were eligible for recruitment as Lecturers. On 3-10-1981 the first respondent - State of Karnataka by its Education Secretary - passed an order No. ED 146 UPC 79 consequent to the introduction of the direct payment of salary scheme with effect from 1-10-1977, in the matter of appointments, transfers etc. As far as promotion to the posts of Readers and Professors, the following qualifications were prescribed, as seen from the Annexures to the said Government Order:-'Readers:Should be a holder of a Degree not lower than a II Class Master Degree in the respective subject of a University, established by law in India or any other qualification recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto. ORShould be holder of Doctorate in the respective subject of a U...
Tag this Judgment!C.S. Kale Gowda Vs. Chief Secretary, Hassan District Zilla Parishad
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-25-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR2781; 1990(2)KarLJ221
Mohan, C.J.1.All these Writ Appeals may be disposed of by this common order, since they raise one and the samepoint.2. The appellants are the Members of Yelechagahalli Mandal Panchayat. They were elected as Members on 20th of January, 1987 under the provisions of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya Panchayats Act, 1983. The appellant namely Y.M. Basappa was further elected as Pradhana of the Mandal Panchayat. The appellants received a notice dated 7th July, 1989 from the Chief Secretary, Hassan District Zilla Parishad, Hassan, calling upon them to show cause why they should not be disqualified under Section 3(1)(A) read with Section 4(1)(a) of the Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1987, stating that a complaint had been preferred by President, Hassan District Janata Party, Hassan (M.G. Dodde Gowda, respondent No. 2 herein) to the effect that the appellants had voluntarily left the party (Janata Party) on which t...
Tag this Judgment!Siddaramappa Bapurao Patil and Others Vs. Ratna Cements (Yadwad) Ltd. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-24-1990
Reported in: [1991]70CompCas27(Kar); 1990(3)KarLJ75
Chandrakantraj Urs, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order made by the company judge in Company Petition No.15 of 1985. The appellants were the petitioners before the company judge. The petition was made under section 398 of the Companies Act. 2. The petitioners pleaded, inter alia, mismanagement of the company, viz., Ratna Cements (Yadwad) Ltd., by its secretary. Respondent NO.2 is the managing director of the company. It is also pleaded that the petitioners had been wrongfully removed from directorship. Another complaint was that the annual general meeting had not been held and that despite demand, statement of accounts for the financial year 1983-84 were not furnished. 3. Respondents Nos.3,7 and 9 are the other group of shareholders who represent 50% of the shareholding in the company. The petitioners group consists of the petitioners and respondent No.8 who represent 50% of the shareholding in the company. It suffices to say that,on the advice of the Industrial Development...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Tool Manufacturers Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-24-1990
Reported in: [1990]79STC396(Kar)
ORDERM. Rams Jois, J. 1. In these two revision petitions presented under section 23(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, the following question of law arises for consideration : 'Whether the notification dated April 23, 1975, issued by the State Government under section 8-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, reducing the rate of tax payable on twist drills, taps dies, reamers cutters, end mills and similar small machine tools from 8 per cent to 4 per cent ceased to be effective from March 15, 1980, on which dated by an amendment to the Act the rate of tax on those items was increased from 8 per cent to 10 per cent, on the ground that the notification falls under section 8-A(1)(a) of the Act ?' 2. In order to appreciate the above question of law, it is necessary to set out the relevant portion of section 8-A of the Act. It reads : '8-A. Power of State Government to notify exemptions and reductions of tax.- (1) The State Government may, by notification, make an exemption or reduct...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »