Karnataka Court February 1991 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.
Durga Works Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1991
Reported in: 1991LC39(Karnataka); 1992(61)ELT375(Kar); 1991(2)KarLJ151
ORDERRajasekhara Murthy, J. 1. The petitioner is a manufacturer of aluminium filter housing castings out of aluminium alloy ingots supplied to them by M/s. Motor Industries Company Ltd., Hosur Road, Bangalore. 2. On 28-11-1986 the petitioner filed a classification list classifying aluminium filter housing castings under tariff sub-heading 7611.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (the Act). By virtue of the Notification No. 182/84 - C.E., dated 1-8-1984, as amended by the Notification No. 79/86 C.E., dated 10-2-1986 the excise duty on the said item was exempt. 3. In regard to the classification list filed on 28-11-1986 (Annexure - A), respondent - 1 issued a show cause notice on 7-5-1987, as per Annexure - C proposing to classify the goods under tariff sub-heading 8421.00 and also to levy the appropriate duty thereon 4. The show cause notice culminated in an order of adjudication dated 14-12-1987 made by the respondent, as per Annexure - D, and the show cause notice was confirmed....
Dynamic Electronics India (Private) Ltd. Vs. Employees' State Insuranc ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1991
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ723Kant
Jagannatha Shetty, J. 1. This appeal is presented under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act ('the Act' for short) against the order passed by the Employees' State Insurance Court, Bangalore, in Employees' State Insurance Application No. 9 of 1982 dated 31st January, 1983, dismissing the application of the appellant filed under Section 75 of the Act.2. Briefly stated, the facts are : The appellant is a small-scale industry. Prior to December 1980, it engaged less than 20 persons. It was not liable to be covered under the provisions of the Act. However, on the basis of the Inspection Report, a notice was issued to the appellant-company, demanding payment of contribution under the Act. The company resisted the same stating that it had employed only 12 employees and hence the provisions of the Act were not applicable. According to the report of Mr. Bhaskaran, the Insurance Inspector, the appellant had engaged 11 employees, seven trainees, one director and one watchman and the ...
Dynamic Electronics (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corpora ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1991
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ158Kant
Jagannath Shetty, J.1. This appeal is presented under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act ('the Act' for short) against the order passed by the Employees' State Insurance Court, Bangalore, in Employees' State Insurance Application No. 9 of 1982 dated January 31, 1983, dismissing the application of the appellant filed under Section 75 of the Act.2. Briefly stated, the facts are : The appellant is a small-scale industry. Prior to December 1980, it engaged less than 20 persons. It was not liable to be covered under the provisions of the Act. However, on the basis of the Inspection Report, a notice was issued to the appellant-company, demanding payment of contribution under the Act. The company resisted the same stating that it had employed only 12 employees and hence the provisions of the Act were not applicable. According to the report of Mr. Bhaskaran, the Insurance Inspector, the appellant had engaged 11 employees, seven trainees, one Director and one watchman and the tota...
Nagarathnamma Vs. Special Deputy Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR813
Mohan, C.J.1. Here is a case of glaring example how an arm of a meaningful law can be twisted to disgorge the benefit earned after a hard fought battle.2. The appellant is the owner of premises bearing No. 116, Railway Parallel Road, 3th Cross, Kumara Park West, Bangalore. The said premises was leased out in favour of M/s. Karnataka State Constructions Corporation Limited (for short Corporation). At that time, the appellant was residing in a rented premises. Therefore, she claimed the premises for her bona fide need and reasonable use. The appellant filed O.S.No. 822 of 1984 before the City Civil Judge, Bangalore, against the said Corporation and prayed for eviction of that tenant and recovery of possession. That suit was decreed on 20th June 1984 on the ground of bona fide need and reasonable use. The tenant agreed to vacate on 30th June 1984 on a compromise memo filed by the parties. The appellant took possession of this property and because the premises had fallen into repairs certa...
Emba Tippamma Vs. Nagappa and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: AIR1991Kant413; ILR1991KAR1410; 1991(1)KarLJ417
ORDERMurlidhar Rao, J.1. Third defendant in O.S. 1 /1978, on the file of the District Judge, Raichur, is the appellant. Respondents I to 4 plaintiffs -- after obtaining leave of the Court filed the suit, under S. 92, C.P.C. for the following reliefs: --1) Removal of defendants 1 and 2, the trustees; 2) Direct these trustees to render accounts from the inception of the Trust and deposit the entire amount in the Court; 3) To appoint suitable person, as trustee; 4) To declare the decree dated 15-3-1976 in O.S. 40/ 76, on the file of the Munsiff. Manvi, as void.2. Among the several contentions urged by defendants in the written statement, it was contended that suit is not maintainable and is barred under S. 92(2), C.P.C. The learned Judge framed 18 issues covering all the disputes. In view of the arguments advanced by Sri Manohar Rao Jagirdhar in this appeal, the one question that goes to the root of the matter is the maintainability of the suit in the light of S. 92(2), C.P.C. read with H...
Smt. Noor Jahan Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its C.O.D. Police and Ot ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: 1993CriLJ102; ILR1991KAR4081; 1992(1)KarLJ294
ORDER1. In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for issue of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus to the respondents to set at liberty the person by name A. Shaik Ahmed, who according to the petitioner is illegally detained by the respondents. Alternatively, she has also prayed for such other order as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case may be passed. 2. The facts necessary for the purpose of deciding the contentions raised on both sides are as follows; 2.1. On 7-10-1990 a complaint was lodged by one Sri M. G. Prakash Rao in the Rural Police Station, Davangere under the jurisdiction of Harihar Circle alleging that on 6th October, 1990 a person by name Srinivas had been done to death by miscreants and the dead body of the said person was thrown behind Balaji Theatre, Davangere; that the said dead body was taken to the C. G. Hospital (Government Hospital, Davangere) in ambulance; that there were marks of injuries on the dead body o...
The State Vs. Sheikh Kadher Sheik Buden
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ3208; ILR1991KAR1874; 1991(1)KarLJ584
Krishnan, J. 1. The State has preferred this appeal against the order of acquittal of respondent hereby by J.M.F.C., Bhatkal in C.C. No. 74 of 1985 in respect of the charges u/S. 304A, IPC and S. 116 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. The charge against the accused-respondent was, that on 7-8-1985 at 5-45 p.m. he drove lorry bearing registration No. MYE5506, in a rash or negligent manner on Bhatkal-Honnavar road near Bailur-Dod-dabalase Cross Road and dashed against one Lakshmi wife of Charge Sheet Witness No. 4 and caused her death and therefore is guilty of the offence u/S. 304A, IPC and 116 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The accused pleaded not guilty and eleven witnesses were examined for the prosecution and after examination of the accused purportedly u/S. 313, Cr.P.C. the Magistrate recorded an order of acquittal. After having gone through the evidence and also the judgment of the learned Magistrate, we concur with the final order of acquittal though for reasons altogether different from ...
Abdul Khader Mekhri Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR3203; 1991(1)KarLJ371
ORDERK.A. Swami, J. 1. The applicants in I.A. No. I are the persons interested in the lands in question. Therefore, the application is allowed and they are permitted to come on record as Respondents 3 to 7. Cause title be amended. 2. In this Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have sought for quashing the Notification bearing No. CI/99/SPQ 82 dated 11-8-1982 published in the Official Gazette dated 4-11-1982 issued under Sub-section (1) of Section 28 of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') giving notice of intention to acquire the lands in question along with several other lands. 3. The lands in question are S. Nos. 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58 and 59 of Koorgally Village, Taluk and District Mysore, totally measuring 85 acres. They have also sought for quashing the Notification issued under Section 28(4) of the Act bearing No. CI 99 SPQ.82 dated 11th April 1983 published in the Official Gazette of 5...
The State Vs. Sheik Kadher Sheik Buden
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: 1(1992)ACC127
B.N. Krishnan, J.1. The State has preferred this appeal against the order of acquittal of respondent hereby by J.M.C. Bhatkal in C.C. No. 74 of 1985 in respect of the charges under Section 304-A I.P.C. and Section 116 of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. The charge against the accused-respondent was, that on 7.8.1985 at 5.45 P.M. he drove lorry bearing registration No. MYE-5506, in a rash or negligent manner on Bhatkal Honnavar road near Bailur Doddabalase Cross Road and dashed against one Lakshmi wife of Charge Sheet Witness No. 4 and caused her death and therefore is guilty of the offence under Section 304A I.P.C. and 116 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The accused pleaded not guilty and eleven witnesses were examined for the prosecution and after examination of the accused purportedly under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the Magistrate recorded an order of acquittal. After having gone through the evidence and also the judgment of the learned Magistrate, we concur with the final order of acquittal, though f...
Gat Nagamma W/O Gat Thimmayya Vs. Hardar Bahubali and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Kant208; 1991(1)KarLJ421
ORDER1. This revision petition is filed against the order dated 20-8-1987 passed in Execution Petition No. 48 of 1985 on the file of the Munsiff & J.M.F.C., Raichur, overruling the objections of Judgment-debtors as to the executability of the decree.2. One Nagamma owner of a house situated in Somwarpeth locality of Raichur City mortgaged the same in the year 1956 for a consideration of Rs.400/- by executing a registered simple mortgage deed in favour of the 1st respondent. However, the deed was executed in the name of Bagodi Konayya Shetty as Benami. The respondent-1 along with the said Bagodi Konayya Shetty filed O.S. No. 110 of 1964 against Nagamma for recovery of the mortgage amount by sale of the mortgaged property. A compromise decree was passed in the said suit and Nagamma was directed to pay the decretal amount through instalments. Since she failed to pay the amount as stipulated in the decree, respondent-I filed an Execution case No. 24/3/ 65 seeking the sale of the mortgaged p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »