Karnataka Court October 1993 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.
Sathischandra and Co. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1993
Reported in: ILR1994KAR218; 1994(1)KarLJ469
Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. The question raised by the petitioners pertains to the Excise Year 1985 to 1986 (1.7.1985 to 30.6.1986). The petitioners question the demand issued consequent upon the Amendment of Karnataka Excise (Excise Duties) Rules, 1968 (in short 'the Rules'), under which, the duty was increased to Rs. 6/- from Rs. 4/- per bulk liter.2. The petitioners are Excise Contractors, According to them, they offered their bids on the assumption that the duty would be Rs. 4/- per bulk liter. However, after the commencement of the Excise Year which was on 1st of June, 1985, Rules were amended increasing the duty to Rs. 6/- per bulk liter with effect from 1.8.1985. The demands were issued on various dates somewhere in the year 1987 claiming difference in the duties paid by the petitioners. Mr. A.G. Holla, learned Counsel for the petitioner raised the following contentions:(i) The amended Rules, under which the duty was increased from Rs. 4/- to Rs. 6/- substituted the earlier Rule an...
Gurupadayya Vs. Ashalata
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC62; ILR1994KAR259; 1993(4)KarLJ372
N.D.V.Bhat, J. 1. In this Second Appeal the appellant has challenged the judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge, Bijapur in R.A.No. 75/1988 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsiff, Bijapur in O.S.No. 135/1982.2. The facts leading to the Appeal are as follows;Plaintiffs-1 and 2 are said to be the daughters and plaintiff-3 is said to be the son of defendant - Gurupadayya and they were born to defendant through their mother Drakshayini. They filed a suit at O.S.No. 135/1982 against Gurupadayya .praying for monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs. 85/-. They alleged that their mother Drakshayini was married to Gurupadayya on 24.12,1955 according to Hindu rites and customs and after marriage they lived together for about three years and thereafter there were some quarrels between the two. According to them, though there was a Divorce Deed between the two, the same was not recognised according to the custom in the community to which they belong...
A. Bhaskar and Another Etc. Vs. State of Karnataka and Others, Etc.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-18-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Kant209; ILR1993KAR3103; 1993(4)KarLJ275
ORDER1. In these writ petitions, the petitioners question the legality and validity of two Circulars dated 9-2-1993 and 24-5-1993 issued by the Revenue Department of the State Government. In most of the petitions only the Circular dated 24-5-1993 is under challenge, which as a matter of fact is based on the Circular dated 9-2-1993.2. The petitioners complain that in view of the aforesaid circulars, the jurisdictional Sub-Registrars are refusing to accept the deeds of conveyance for registration.3. The Circular dated 9-2-1993 reads as hereunder:'Government of KarnatakaKarnataka Government Secretariat,M.S. Building,No: RD 16 LGP 93 Bangalore, dated 9th Feb., 1993Circular : Sub : Discussions held by the Hon'ble Minister for Revenue with the officers on serveral aspects of Government lands and conversions with particular reference to Bangalore District -- Ban on issue of Kaneshumari numbers in Form 10 of Gramthanas land and ban on registration -- reg. ----- It has come to the notice of Gov...
State of Karanataka Vs. Babu Alias Venkatesh
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-14-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)ALT(Cri)521; 1994CriLJ651; ILR1993KAR3585; 1994(1)KarLJ203
ORDER1. The State has preferred this petition under section 439(2) Cr.P.C. for cancellation of the bail granted to the respondent herein who is the accused in S.C. No. 165/92 on the file of the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Bangalore. 2. It is seen that the accused preferred I.A. II before the learned Sessions Judge under section 167 of the Cr.P.C. for being released on bail on the ground that the charge sheet had not been filed within 90 days from the date of arrest, by the investigating officer. Despite the objection by the learned Public Prosecutor that the period of 90 days had to be counted from the date on which the accused was produced before the Jurisdictional Magistrate and not from the date of arrest and that the charge sheet had been filed within 90 days from the date on which the accused was produced before the Jurisdictional Magistrate, by the police and despite the fact that the decision of the Supreme Court in : [1986]2SCR1128 was brought to the notice of the learned Sessions ...
M. Usha Ramaprasad Vs. Indian Trade Promotion Organisation, New Delhi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-14-1993
Reported in: ILR1994KAR1318; 1994(2)KarLJ179
ORDERN.Y. Hanumanthappa, J. 1. The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to appoint her on compassionate grounds by giving the following reasons to grant such a relief : 2. The petitioner is the widow of S. Ramaprasad who was working as a Deputy Regional Manager of the Respondent-Organization. He was appointed on 28.2.1991 and his appointment was confirmed on 27.2.1992. While he was in service, he met with an accident and died on 31.12.1992 at Manipal Hospital at Bangalore leaving behind the petitioner and a son aged about 13 years. During his life-time, he was provided with a residential accommodation by the respondents. The petitioner and her son are still staying therein. The petitioner is a Science graduate. As Ramaprasad who was the only bread-earner in the family died while he was in service, the petitioner thought fir to seek employment on compassionate grounds, so that herself and her child can manage to live. Accordingly, she gave a rep...
Electronic Enterprises Vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-14-1993
Reported in: ILR1994KAR125; 1994(1)KarLJ590
ORDERShivashankar Bhat, J.1. A disappointed tenderer is the petitioner. In September 1992, the first respondent invited sealed tenders in two parts, for supply and erection of Public Address System, required at the Thermal Power Station, from those 'who have successfully designed, manufactured, erected and commissioned and similar or higher capacity of Public Address System (Distributed Type) which have been in successful operation for a period of around two years in atleast two different thermal power stations reckoned as on the date of opening of Part-I'. It was stated that Part-1 shall comprise of technical commercial terms and conditions along with the earnest money deposit of Rs. 25,000/- and Part-II shall comprise of prices only. Last date for submitting tenderers was 6.11.1992 upto 1.00 noon and Part-l was to be opened on the same day at 3.00 p.m. in the presence of the tenders who choose to be present; Part-II was to be opened at a date to be intimated later.2. Petitioner, the ...
Nnjunda and Others Vs. Court of the 1st Additional District Judge and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-13-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Kant141
ORDER1. The petitioners claim to be the lessees of certain premises belonging to third respondent temple. There is no dispute that earlier they were in the- occupation and subsequently when the premises were altered they were given certain shops under the lease. After the, lease period was over they were asked to vacate the premises. Subsequently eviction proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1984, ('the P. P. Act' for short). The order of the Estate Officer was affirmed by the District Judge, Mysore. Hence these writ petitions.2. Mr. Parthasarathy, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, contended that the P. P. Act is inapplicable because this is an institution not under the management of the Government and only the premises belonging to a Mujrai institution under the management of the Government could be governed by the provisions of the Act, if not the tenants could be evicted only by recourse to ...
J. Dayanand Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-13-1993
Reported in: ILR1993KAR3093; 1994(2)KarLJ641
ORDERC. Shivappa, J. 1. The petitioner passed Second P.U.C. examination held by the Pre-University Board of the State of Karnataka in the month of March/April, 1992 securing 87% of marks in his optional subjects (P.C.B). He appeared for common entrance examination held by the Government of Karnataka in April, 1992 and secured marks as under: a)Physics--57.50%out of 60%b)Chemistry--58.75% out of 60%c)Biology--58.75%out of 60%Total:175 outof 180He secured 91.90% average marks in the P.U.C. and Entrance Examination. His ranking is No. 545 in the rank list. The petitioner sought admission to the t year M.B.B.S. course for the year 1992-93 in the General Merit category. It is submitted that admissions to the I year M.B.B.S. Course in Karnataka are governed by the provisions contained in the rules called 'The Karnataka Medical Colleges (Selection of Candidates for Admission to I year M.B.B.S. Course) Rules, 1988 (in short 'THE RULES'). Respondents 1 to 3 are required to follow these Rules st...
Deccan Enterprises Vs. Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-13-1993
Reported in: ILR1993KAR3280; 1994(1)KarLJ227
ORDERShivaprakash, J.1. The petitioner, which is a registered partnership firm, purchased premises bearing old Nos. 20-A, 20-B, 20-C, 21, 21-A, 21-B (New Nos. 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 and 60/1), M.G. Road, Bangalore, under a deed of sale dated 8-8-1985. After deriving title to the aforesaid properties, the petitioner sought transfer of Khatha in terms of Section 114 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Accordingly, the respondent-Corporation transferred the Khata in the name of the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner-firm has applied for permission to construct a new building at the aforesaid premises.2. The existing old buildings are in the occupation of certain tenants. It appears, J. Rajabalan, an Advocate of the Bangalore Bar, was in occupation of a portion of the first floor of premises No. 54. It seems he had objected to the issue of licence in favour of the petitioner for construction of a new building on the gr...
Sadanandaiah Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-12-1993
Reported in: ILR1993KAR3119
S.B. Majmudar, C.J.1. This Writ Appeal is moved by the original Writ petitioner whose Writ Petition came to be dismissed by the learned single Judge.2. A few relevant facts leading to this Writ Appeal which require to be noted at the out-set to appreciate the grievance of the Writ appellant, are:-The Appellant is a City Municipal Councillor of Chitradurga City Municipality. The State of Karnataka acting under Section 2 of the Karnataka Urban Development Authority Act, 1987, [hereinafter referred to as the Act] appointed the Appellant as a Member of Chitradurga Urban Development Authority, by its Order dated 28.2.1992, That Order stated that the appointment of the Appellant was till further orders. The contention of the Appellant was that as per Section 3 of the Act, the Urban Development Authority has to be constituted for development of the Urban Area as per Section 3(3) of the Act and the Authority shall consist amongst others of an elected Member of the Local Authority, concerned wh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »