Karnataka Court November 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.
Sharbappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1993
Reported in: ILR1994KAR155; 1994(2)KarLJ172
ORDERSreenivasa Reddy, J.1. The petitioner has sought for issuance of a Writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated 28.5.1993 issued by the second respondent as per Annexure-A demanding a sum of Rs. 7,200/- towards the conversion fine in respect of an area measuring 60,000 sq. feet in Survey No. 5/2 of Honalli Village, Lingasugar TaluK, Raichur District.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that Rule 107 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 provides for levy of fine for conversion of agricultural lands for non-agricultural purposes as per the table of fine appended to Rule 107. According to said table, different rates of fine are prescribed for lands situated in different parts of the State of Karnataka.3. The land in question falls under Serial No. 5 of the table i.e., 'other places'. The rate of fine prescribed under Rule 107 for conversion of land for residential purposes in respect of 'other places' is 0.03 ps. per square feet. According to ...
Shivalingeshwar Oil Mill Vs. Chennaveerappa Basalingappa Kaddi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1993
Reported in: ILR1994KAR535; 1994(1)KarLJ465
ORDERM. Ramakrishna, J1. The Revision Petitioner is a Judgment-debtor in Execution Case No. 6/1991 on the file of the Court of Munsiff, Haveri. He filed an application-I.A.I. seeking for certain interrogatories along with a copy of the objection in which a specific stand was taken by him saying that Judgment-debtor is a debtor within the meaning of the Karnataka Debt Relief Act, 1960 (Karnataka Act 29/1980), (the Act for short).2. He has prayed for dismissing the Execution Petition on the ground that he is not liable to pay the decree amount as he is entitled to take defence available under the said Act.3. In the course of the objection, he has brought to the notice of the Court that he being a Debtor under the Act, the decree cannot be executed against him to recover the decreetal amount. The learned Munsiff rejected the application, holding that he cannot go beyond the decree. Aggrieved by this order, the Judgment-Debtor has approached this Court in this Revision Petition.4. I have h...
Consolidated Coffee Ltd. Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer and Anoth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-02-1993
Reported in: [1994]206ITR710(KAR); [1994]206ITR710(Karn); 1994(38)KarLJ187
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The petitioner-company is a coffee grower. Its accounting year ended with June 30. The writ petition pertains to the assessment year 1988-89 (previous year ending on June 30, 1987). The petitioner submitted its annual return of income; along with the return the petitioner also submitted the audited accounts as well as the report of the auditor and a few other documents. The first respondent who is the assessing authority decided to make a provisional assessment under section 20 of the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act', for short) while considering the return filed by the petitioner. In the process, the first respondent thought it fit to issue a proposition notice pointing out that the petitioner had estimated the value of the coffee at Rs. 8 per point and the petitioner has not disclosed any definite and specific principle or basis for arriving at this rate of Rs. 8 per point.Consequently,the first respondent proposed to apply rule 9(c) o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›