Karnataka Court November 1992 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.
Sree Gajanana Motor Transport Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-20-1992
Reported in: II(1993)ACC6; ILR1993KAR30; 1993(1)KarLJ344
ORDERShivashankar Bhat, J.1. In all these Writ Petitions, the petitioners are challenging the. validity of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation (Amendment) Act, 1987 (Karnataka Act No. 8 of 1987) (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Act). So far as the said Act relates to the increase of the Tax on the Stage Carriage Vehicles on inter-state routes under Part-A of the Schedule. In other words, the petitioners are aggrieved by the sub-items (3A)(a) and (4A)(a) of Item No. 4 of the said part. Consequently reliefs are sought. The impugned Act is challenged as violative of Articles 14 and 301 of the Constitution of India. All the petitioners are Inter-State Stage Carriage operators. The substance of their grievance is that, they have been discriminated in the matter of taxation as against similar operators who operate intra-state. 2. Prior to the impugned Act, the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 was substantially amended in the year 1986 as per the Karnataka Motor Vehicles ...
C.B. Nanjundappa Vs. Chief Secretary, Zilla Parishad
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-20-1992
Reported in: ILR1992KAR3732; 1993(1)KarLJ54
K.A. Swami, Ag. C.J. 1. This Writ Appeal is preferred against the order dated 18th September 1992, passed in Writ Petition No. 2848 of 1992. The learned single Judge has rejected the Writ Petition. Therefore, the petitioner-appellant has come up in the Appeal. 2. In the Writ Petition, the petitioner has sought for quashing the 'No objection' Certificate dated 29.6.1991 produced as Annexure-A inthe Writ Petition issued by the Pradhan, Chelur Mandal Panchayath, Gubbi Taluk. The 'No objection' Certificate was to the effect that the Mandal Panchayath had no objection for running a liquor shop in the premises bearing Khaneshmarr No. 223 of Chelur village. 3. The contention of the appellant-petitioner is that no place within the jurisdiction of a Mandal Panchayat shall be used as a shop whether permanently or temporarily, other than a shop referred to in Section 67 and 68, except under a licence granted or renewed by the Mandal Panchayat and except in accordance with the conditions specified...
Sri Laxmi Bhavan TiffIn Room and Coffee Works Vs. State of Karnataka a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-19-1992
Reported in: [1993]90STC516(Kar)
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. The petitioner asserts himself to be a dealer in a hotel business. The hotel is registered as Sri Laxmi Bhavan Tiffin Room and Coffee Works. In addition to the hotel business, he is also carrying on business in coffee powder and leco. The writ petition pertains to the year 1984-85. 2. The petitioner sought the benefit of composition under section 17(4) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the Act', for short). The petitioner's application was rejected and ultimately an order of assessment came to be made. 3. The short question is whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of section 17(4) of the said Act and the said benefit could be confined to the turnover pertaining to the hotel business as sought for by the petitioner 4. Section 17 provides for composition of tax. As per sub-section (1), certain dealers are entitled to seek the benefit, other than a dealer liable to tax under section 5(3)(a) or a dealer referred to in section 10(2). By amendment...
K.C. Setty Vs. Additional Commercial Tax Officer and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-19-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)KarLJ133; [1993]89STC535(Kar)
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The petitioner is a hotelier. A notice under section 12A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, was issued pertaining to the assessment year 1984-85. Thereafter, an order was made on July 24, 1987, overruling the objections of the assessee. Since the order was sought to be justified by the amendment made to the Constitution by which article 366, clause (29-A) was introduced, the petitioner challenged the same by filing the present writ petition. 2. The petitioner has mainly sought the striking down of clause (29-A (f) of article 366 of the Constitution. The petitioner has also sought for the quashing of explanation (3-A) to the provisions of section 2(1)(t) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. As a consequence, the petitioner has also sought for the setting aside of the order dated July 24, 1987, made under section 12A. 3. On merits, the petitioner contended that his objections were not considered by the assessing authority while passing the order. 4. It is t...
Managing Director, Ksrtc Vs. Shankarappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-17-1992
Reported in: I(1993)ACC703; ILR1993KAR324; 1993(1)KarLJ46
M. Ramakrishna, J.1. In this Appeal the K.S.R.T.C. has challenged the correctness and legality of the judgment and award made in favour of the claimant.2. We have heard learned Counsel on both sides. The main argument advanced by the learned Counsel for the appellant is that according to the claimant the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver, therefore the claimants ought to have impleaded the owner and the driver of the lorry. In the absence of the owner and the driver of the lorry, the Tribunal should not have proceeded to award compensation as against the driver of the K.S,R.T.C. Bus.3. It is seen by a perusal of the Judgment of this Court in K.S.R.T.C. v. RENY MAMMEN, : ILR1990KAR3181 that in similar circumstance, the Division Bench of this Court held against the claimants and remitted the matter for reconsideration. Referring to the facts and circumstances of that case and the plea that the owner and driver of the lorry involved in th...
The Krishi Mattu Ksheera Utpadaka Vividhoddesha Sahakari Sangh Niyamit ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-16-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Kant20
ORDERShyamsundar, J. 1. This is a reference made by a Division Bench consisting of our brethren Mr. Justice Venkatachala and Mr. Justice Murlidher Rao as their Lordships then were commending to the consideration of a Full Bench a brace of two questions, acting under Section 7 of the Karnataka High Courts Act. The need for the reference arose at the hearing of R.F.A. 57 of 1990. The two questions as formulated by the Bench are :'1. Whether the words 'any act' found inSection 125 of the Karnataka Co-operativeSocieties Act is referable to the Co-operativeSociety or an officer of a Co-operativeSociety or both? 2. Whether the words 'any act' is referable only to illegal omissions'?The aforesaid questions for consideration appear to have arisen according to theirLordships in the light of two decisions of this Court i.e. The Bank of Citizens, Belguam v. Balwant Venkatesh Patodar, 1961 Mys LJ 397 and (ii) Somwarpet Nad Agricultural Produce Marketing Co-operative Society Limited v. Sha Mangilal...
Paragounda Vs. Bhimappa and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-16-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Kant103; 1992(4)KarLJ652
ORDERHakeem, J.1. In this reference under Section 7 of the Karnataka High Court Act, the following questions are referred for the opinion of the Full Bench :--'(1) Whether the Full Bench decision of this Court reported in : ILR1990KAR1 (FB) applies to a case only where the transfer of ownership of a vehicle is entered in the Certificate of Registration as required under Section 31 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, and has no application whereat is not so entered? (2) If the answer to the above question is in the negative, whether the decision reported in 1990 (2) Kar LJ 281 is good law?' 2. Since the reference has arisen in a review petition, the brief facts of the case leading to the reference are stated as under :--On 24-2-1987, the car bearing Registration No. MRZ 5694 driven by respondent-5, while proceeding on Saundatti-Munawalli Road in Belgaum District, dashed against P.W. 1 Gujjawwa and Tulasawwa, causing injuries to the former and instant death of the latter person. The acciden...
Paragounda Vs. Bhimappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-16-1992
Reported in: ILR1992KAR3709
Krishnan, J. 1. In this Civil Petition, the Petitioner seeks review of our Judgment dated 3.11.1990 dismissing his Appeal (M.F.A.No.2027 of 1990), following the Full Bench Decision of this Court reported in : ILR1990KAR1 . The learned Advocate for the petitioner contends that the said Decision has no application to the facts of the present case, because transfer of ownership of the vehicle in question has not been entered in the Registration Certificate and other records as required by Section 31 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. He seeks to rely upon the Decision reported in AIR 1986 AP 62 (FB) holding that the public liability of the transferor, so far as third party risk is concerned, continues till he discharges his statutory obligation under Sections 29A and 31 read with Section 94 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Full Bench of this Court with reference to the said Decision at page-6 has observed thus: '........ Therefore, whatever observations that have been made in the Decision of ...
Hukkeri Taluka Primary Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-13-1992
Reported in: [1995]82CompCas620(Kar); ILR1993KAR676; 1993(1)KarLJ492
Shivaraj Patil, J. 1. The petitioner has questioned the validity and correctness of the letter dated October 19, 1992, annexure 'E' addressed to the petitioner-bank by the secretary of the first respondent-bank. 2. Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner-bank has maintained an excellent record. Its recovery of loans was 63.53 per cent. and has credited more than 50 per cent. of the amount so recovered to the first respondent-bank. He further submitted that the petitioner-bank is adjudged as the best bank in performance. He also submitted that the entire amount recovered could not be credited because subsidy and interest difference available was not finalised before April 15, 1992. Be that as it may, we are concerned with the interpretation of section 20(2)(b)(iv) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act'), in order to decide whether the petitioner has right to vote at a meeting of the co-operative society. 3...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Chandy Joseph and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-12-1992
Reported in: [1994]80CompCas778(Kar); 1993(1)KarLJ326
M. Ramakrishna, J.1. This appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is by the insurer challenging the correctness and the legality of the finding recorded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal IX, Bangalore, on issue No. 4 in paragraph 13 of its judgment that the liability of the insurer cannot be limited to Rs. 50,000 and that the entire amount of the compensation awarded has to be paid by the insurer. 2. On 14th July, 1989, at about 7.30 p.m. while one Alex Joseph, son of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 was driving a two wheeler-scooter bearing No. CAR 4539 on Hosur Road, Bangalore, a motor car bearing No. 5727 came with a great speed and dashed against him resulting in bodily injuries. Subsequently, he died. Thereupon, the parents of the deceased the Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, with an application under section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation for the death of their son. 3. The Tribunal examined PWs 1 and 2 and mark...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »