Karnataka Court December 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.
Mohamud Abdul Hadi Banavasi Vs. Syed Davood Syed Abdul Razak Kazi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-02-1993
Reported in: ILR1994KAR74; 1993(4)KarLJ693
N.D.V. Bhat, J.1. This is a Second Appeal preferred against the judgment and decree dated 11.2.1985 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sirsi, in R.A.No. 41/1984. By the said judgment, the learned Civil Judge confirmed the judgment and decree dated 23.8.1984 passed by the learned. Additional Munsiff, Sirsi, in O.S.No. 84/1983, The learned Additional Munsiff, Sirsi, by his judgment had decreed the suit of the plaintiff in O.S.No. 84/1983 declaring that the order of compulsory retirement passed against him (plaintiff) on 1.7.1983 following the Resolution dated 3.6.1983 is ultra-virus illegal and opposed to principles of Natural Justice with a further declaration that plaintiff has the right to continue in service till the age of superannuation, as also with certain other reliefs referred to in the operative portion of the judgment.2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this Appeal briefly stated are as under:Plaintiff-respondent-1 was a Headmaster in Union High School, Sirsi, which adm...
The Karnataka Contract Labour and Transport Co-op. Society Ltd. and Ot ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Kant147; ILR1993KAR3417; 1993(4)KarLJ472
ORDERS. B. Majmudar, C. J.1. These fourWrit Appeals and five Writ Petitions raise common questions of law and fact and hence they were heard together by consent of learned Advocates of respective parties and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The Food Corporation of India is a common respondent-1 in all these proceedings.3. It is a statutory Corporation having been constituted by the Central Government under S. 3 of the Food Corporation of India Act, 1964. Its main object is of implementing Food Policy and for taking-up State Trading in food stuffs on an appropriate scale and to build up buffer stocks gradually etc. As it is a Statutory Corporation, it is a 'State' within the meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution of India being covered by the phrase 'Other Authority' as mentioned thereunder. There is no dispute between the parties on this aspect. The Supreme Court in the case of The Workmen of the Food Corporation of India v. M/s. Food Corporation of India, : (1985)IILLJ...
Hyderabad Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-1993
Reported in: [1994]207ITR865(KAR); [1994]207ITR865(Karn); 1994(38)KarLJ203
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The petitioner is an assessee assessed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-II, Hyderabad, under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short). In respect of the various years, excess tax paid by the petitioner was refunded. The petitioner claimed interest under section 214 and 244(1A) of the Act. Regarding the claim under section 244(1A), the assessing authority allowed interest to some extent; as to the interest under section 214, the assessing authority followed the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The excess tax claimed to have been paid by the petitioner includes the advance tax paid. This fact is necessary to appreciate the contention raised under section 244(1A). The petitioner filed revision petitions before the Commissioner under section 264 of the Act without any success. Hence these writ petitions. 2. Learned counsel for the Revenue raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of these...
Nova Granites (India) Ltd. Vs. Coach Kraft (Bangalore) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-1993
Reported in: ILR1994KAR52; 1993(4)KarLJ661
N.D.V. Bhat, J 1. This Civil Revision Petition is preferred against the order dated 21-10-1993 passed by the Additional City Civil Judge on I.A.I in Original Suit No. 5406 of 1993. By the said order, the learned Judge has issued temporary injunction after treating the defendants ex-parte on acceptance of the endorsement of the process server that the summons and notice were refused by both the defendants. The learned Single Judge of this Court before whom the Revision came up for admission, has referred this matter to the Division Bench since according to him, the procedure relating to the issue of notice of application for an interim order when a Caveat Petition is filed and the maintainability of a Revision petition against an interim order without notice to the Lawyer representing the caveator are required to be thrashed out once for all by the Division Bench. 2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this Petition briefly stated are as under:- Plaintiff-respondent-1 filed a suit at...
Vijayakumar Vs. State
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-01-1993
Reported in: ILR1994KAR491
Hiremath, J1. The accused was convicted by the Trial Court under Section 302 (sic)nd sentenced to imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- with default sentence. He has challenged this judgment of conviction in this Appeal.2. The facts are brief and simple. It was PW.13 who set the law in motion by filing a complaint at the Mahadevapura Police Station at 11.15 p.m. on 27.9.91 that on the night of 27.9.91 when he was sleeping in his house, his acquaintances Ramachandra and Muniraju approached him at 10.45 P.M. and told that the deceased Basavaradhya employed in the Telephone Factory was lying in a pool of blood near a certain Hotel Shameer in Mahadevapura and having gone there he saw the injured Basavaradhya struggling for life. Even before he could be shifted for treatment, he breathed his last. He complained that some unknown persons had stabbed him and escaped. This was received by PW. 21 the A.S.I. in charge of the police station at 11 P.M. on which he registered a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›