Karnataka Court August 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.
Sharanamma Vs. State
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-08-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR3629
ORDERS. Mohan, C.J.1. All these Writ Petitions can be dealt with under a common order. The facts are as under:-The Writ Petitions are to quash the Notification dated 23-12-1983 issued under Section 13(1) of the Karnataka improvement Boards Act, 1976 (the Act for short), as well as the Preliminary Notification dated 24-11-1977 issued under Section 15(1) of the Act.2. The City Improvement Board, Gulbarga (hereinafter called the Board), one of the respondents in these Writ Petitions, has been constituted under the provisions of the Act. The Board in its Meeting held on 25-5-1977 resolved to take residential development scheme on the filter bed comprising 159 acres and A guntas of land in various survey numbers. Accordingly, the development scheme was prepared and the same was forwarded to the Government for approval. The Government exercising its power under the Act approved the scheme. Thereafter, the Board issued the notification under Section 15(1) of the Act on 24-11-1977. This was pu...
Angels Travels Vs. K. Chikkayya Naik and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-08-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ129; 1991(1)KarLJ37
M.P. Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This appeal is by the owner of the motor vehicle bearing registration mark KET 3229 against the compensation awarded to the claimants in M.V.C. No. 315 of 1984 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and District Judge, Mangalore.2. The said case came to be disposed of along with other cases in view of the fact that the vehicle belonging to the appellant-owner was involved in an accident with the other motor vehicle bearing registration mark MYG 4732 near Karnataka Bank at Kumbasi on National Highway No. 17, when the motor vehicle bearing registration mark MYG 4732 was proceeding towards Koteswar. The bus belonging to the appellant-owner before us was dangerously driven and dashed against the other motor vehicle MYG 4732 as a result of which several persons were injured and some died. One of the persons who died was the son of the claimants in M.V.C. No. 315 of 1984. The claimants are the parents of the deceased.3. It will be useful at this sta...
iqbal Vs. K.S. Sai Baba, I.F.S. Authorised Officer and Dy. Conservator ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-07-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ798; ILR1990KAR3083; 1990(2)KarLJ239
ORDER1. The complaint that is lodged before us is the violation of the order made by our learned brother Justice Murlidher Rao rendered in Writ Petition No. 4513 of 1990 dated 4th of April, 1990. The learned Judge passed the order concerning the seizure of the vehicle bearing No. CNT 9362 made on 6-12-1989 as follows :- 'The respondent the Authorised Officer and Deputy Conservator of Forests is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner within 15 days from today and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, keeping in view the rulings of this Court and Supreme Court on the subject.' 2. Thereafter the Authorised Officer the Deputy Conservator of Forests made an order on 3-5-1990 to the following effect : 'Brief Facts of the Case : Forest Mobile Squads, Bangalore and Kolar along with the staff of Hoskote Range, while waiting near Budigere cross of Hoskote-Devancahalli road, as they received reliable information regarding smuggling of sandalwood, tried to stop the ...
Mohammad Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-07-1990
Reported in: 1992CriLJ89; 1990(2)KarLJ278
ORDER1. Section 104-D of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 is challenged in this writ petition and the petitioner has sought for a declaration that the said provision is illegal and void in law. He has also asked for a direction to the Magistrate to release him on bail without reference to Section 104-D of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that Section 104-D of the Act offends Art. 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. The argument is that Section 104-D permits detention of a person even before a trial in regard to the allegation of commission of an offence. The said provision, according to the petitioner, affects the personal liberty. In short, the argument is that the impugned provision is unreasonable and highly arbitrary. 3. The said provision reads as follows :- '104-D. Special provision regarding bail :- Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (Central Act 2 of 1974) no person accused of a forest offence, pu...
Davanagere Sugar Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of Inida (Uoi)
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-07-1990
Reported in: ILR1990KAR3653
ORDERMohan, C.J.All these matters can be dealt with under a common Judgment.2. The facts which are not in controversy may be stated as under:Sugar has been declared as an essential commodity under the Essential Commodities Act, 1967. The Union Government has been regulating the production and distribution of sugar. During the year 1974-75 the Union Government was pursuing a policy popularly known as partial control under which part of the sugar produced by the manufacturers of sugar was required to be sold to the Union Government. The price was to be determined by the Union Government in accordance with the principles enumerated in Section 3(3)(c) of the Essential Commodities Act. When the price control orders were challenged by the Writ Petitioner in W.P. No. 3636 of 1975, interim stay was ordered permitting the petitioner-Company to collect a price which was higher than the price determined under the Levy Sugar Price Fixation Order. The Writ Petition came to be heard along with many ...
Canara Bank Vs. Beauline and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: [1992]75CompCas775(Kar); 1990(2)KarLJ392
Swami, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff is preferred against the decree dated February 12, 1980, passed by the II Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore City, in O.S. No. 675 of 1977.2. At the outset, Sri Vedantha Iyengar, learned counsel for the respondents-defendants Nos. 3 to 6 and 8 to 11, raised a preliminary objection that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in sub-section (3) of section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, as the decree under appeal is one passed on a compromise. It is also next contended that awarding of interest from the date of the decree till the date of realisation is in the discretion of the court; that there was no compromise in this regard by the parties. Hence, the future interest awarded at 6 per cent. per annum is in accordance with law and as such it is not liable to be interfered with.3. The appeal in question is confined to the awarding of future interest at 6 per cent. per annum from the date of the decree. Therefore, the two...
G. Vitobha Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: ILR1991KAR888
M. Rama Jois, J. 1. This sales tax appeal is presented under section 24 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, against the order of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dated June 3, 1985, made in exercise of his power under section 22-A of the said Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are these : The appellant was a partner of a partnership firm under the name and style 'M/s. Shashi Wine Centre', Kadur. The firm was registered and started its business in January, 1975. There were in all 13 partners. In July, 1976 the firm was dissolved and a new firm came into existence comprising of 5 erstwhile partners and 7 new partners and they continued the business under the same firm name. An order of assessment had been passed for the year 1975-76 by the assessing authority. Subsequently on coming to know that there had been suppression of turnover and consequently that turnover of the assessee had escaped turnover, proceedings were initiated under section 12-A of the Act and a revised order was...
Ramaiah Setty Vs. Meena
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ300; ILR1991KAR937; 1990(2)KarLJ281
M.P. Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. These two appeals are by Sri Ramaiah Setty. The appellant before us was respondent No. 1 in Motor Vehicle Case Nos. 1716, 1717 and 1718/1987 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, No. VIII, Bangalore City.2. The claimants had alleged that on 18-11-1987 at about 9-40 p.m. on P.S. Lane Road, Bangalore, when the petitioner in MVC.1716/1987 was proceeding on his scooter, bearing registration mark MEV 6054 along with his wife and daughter (who were the petitioners in the other two connected petitions), a motor vehicle bearing registration mark CAI.6799 was driven at a high speed on P.S. Lane from the opposite direction and dashed against the scooter of the petitioner. Due to the impact the petitioner, his wife and daughter sustained injuries and the scooter was heavily damaged. After the accident the claimants were taken to Victoria hospital where they were treated. The petitioners had alleged that due to the rash and negligent driving of scooter b...
Balaji Paper Agency Vs. Mysore Paper and Board Co.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: ILR1991KAR2563
K.A. Swami, J. 1. This Appeal is preferred against the Judgment and decree dated 10-8-1979 passed by the learned VIII Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore City in O.S.No. 243/1976. The appellants are defendants 1 and 2. The respondents 1 and 2 are plaintiffs 1 and 2 and respondent No. 3 is defendant No. 4.2. Respondents 1 and 2 filed the aforesaid suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 94,909-43 ps. from the defendants 1 to 4. We may also mention that defendant No. 3 is not made a party to the Appeal because the suit has been decreed against defendant No. 3. Defendant No. 3 is a partnership firm of which the 4th defendant who is 3rd respondent in the appeal is one of the partners.3. The suit was based on the ground that the plaintiffs supplied certain goods to defendants 1 and 2 at the instance of defendant No. 4 who represented to the plaintiffs as the partner of defendants 1 and 2. That defendants 1 and 2 received the goods and agreed to pay the price of the goods after a certain date and th...
Unico Trading and Chit Funds (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Zahoor Hassan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-03-1990
Reported in: [1993]76CompCas419(Kar)
M.P. Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. This is an application filed by the official liquidator claiming from respondent Zahoor Hassan a sum of Rs. 13,756 together with current interest, pendente lite. Objection have been filed today, though it has not yet formed part of the records. In the copy with counsel for the respondent, it is admitted that the respondent was a member of the Union Chit Funds, a unit of the Unico Trading and Chit Funds (India) P. Ltd., the company in liquidation. He has further admitted that he had chit transactions with the company in liquidation and that he had subscribed up to the seventh instalment in group NCI chait at Nagpur branch.2. The official liquidator has examined on of the office assistants as PW-1 and got marked as many as six documents. They are : the pro forma plaint which was permitted to be filed by an order of this court in such form having regard to the large number of claim petitions which were required to be filed before they came to be barred by li...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »