Karnataka Court December 1994 Judgments
K. Janardhan Hotel Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-23-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR342
S. Rajendra Babu, J.1. This petition is filed by the assessee and the assessment period with which we are concerned is from April 1, 1983 to March 31, 1984. The notification had been issued by the Government on March 10, 1982, in exercise of its powers under section 8-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the Act', for short) reducing from 4 per cent to 2 per cent with effect from April 1, 1982, the basic rate of tax payable by any dealer under the said Act on the sale of food and drinks to their customers in a hotel or restaurant. By amendment to the Act, by Act 13 of 1982 with effect from April 1, 1982, the rate of tax was increased to 5 per cent. The question that arises for consideration is whether section 8-A(3-A) of the Act which was in force at the relevant time would be attracted to the facts of the case : 'If the rate of tax payable under this Act in respect of any goods or class of goods gets modified by an amendment to this Act, notification, if any, issued in respect of ...
Tag this Judgment!Kannan Vs. District Magistrate
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-23-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR1336
ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J1. By this Petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.9.1994, passed by the District Magistrate, Shimoga, whereby, the District Magistrate cancelled the No Objection Certificate dated 29.12.1992, taking the view that the applicant has neither commenced the construction of the cinema house within a period of 12 months from the date of the No Objection Certificate nor has applied for extension of time under Rule 28(3) of the Karnataka Cinema Regulations 1971, after having remitted a sum of Rs. 1000/- as fee to the Government under a receipt for the same.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner is the owner in possession of the land bearing Sy.No. 19/3-B-2 of Gopala Village, Shimoga District measuring 1877.75 sq. meters and he made the application to the District Magistrate for the issue of a No Objection Certificate under the Karnataka Cinema (Regulation) Rules, 1971, (for short 'Rules, 1971'), to enable the petitioner to construc...
Tag this Judgment!C.H. Narayana Vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Bangalore and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-22-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR680; 1995(2)KarLJ381; (1996)ILLJ569Kant
ORDERM.F. Saldanha, J. 1. This petition once again raises the vexed question as to whether an employee should be permitted virtually on the eve of his retirement, to present a challenge with regard to his correct date of birth. The consensus of judicial opinion is heavily in favour of the position that the date of birth once recorded in the service records is sacrosanct and that no alteration would normally be permissible particularly at a belated stage. The overriding considerations in favour of this view are that the records are presumed to represent the correct state of affairs because those entries are based on the information furnished by the employee and the principle of estoppel will bar the employee from going back on those representations. The attendant difficulty of doing a virtual post-mortem after the lapse of several decades creates its own hazards and problems insofar as it would be extremely difficult for the employer to investigate the circumstances under which the entr...
Tag this Judgment!Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board Vs. Bangalore Water Supply a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-22-1994
Reported in: (1996)ILLJ801Kant
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. A very unusual situation, though not unfamiliar where public authorities are concerned has arisen in this case which throws up for consideration an issue of far reaching consequence which may be summarised as follows.If, in a disciplinary proceedings, gross misconduct has been proved against a public servant and an order of dismissal is passed against him and where the matter goes wholly and completely by default before a Labour Court principally because of the abnormally long efflux of time during which the material witness has retired and is not available, whether the benefit of such default should accrue to the errant employee? In other words, should a public authority be made to pay back-wages for 19 1/2 years in the face of a record that would normally justify the disciplinary order, merely because the order was not substantiated before the lower court or whether, it is essential, in the public interest and for purposes of doing real justice to mould the relief...
Tag this Judgment!E.S. Rajan Vs. R. Mohan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-22-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR492; 1994(5)KarLJ357
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. This is a Defendant's Appeal arising out of a suit for specific performance tried and decreed against him by the III Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore.A few facts that have led to the filing of this Appeal may be stated first:The Defendant/Appellant before us is the absolute owner of the suit property comprising a two storeyed house situated at 5th Main Road, 'A' Block, Rajajinagar, Second Stage, Bangalore-560 010. By an Agreement to Sell dated 3rd of January, 1985, the Appellant agreed to sell the said property to the respondent-Vendee for a total sale consideration of Rs. 6,30,000/-. The Agreement, execution whereof is not in dispute inter-alia, envisaged the following:'i) Out of the total consideration of Rs. 6,30,000/- the Vendor acknowledged the receipt of Rs. 50,000/- as advance and agreed to receive the balance of Rs. 5,80,000/- at the time of registration of the sale deed;ii) The sale deed was to be executed and registered within six months from the ...
Tag this Judgment!Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board Vs. General Secretary, Bwssb ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-22-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR688a; 1994(5)KarLJ347
ORDERM.F. Saldanha, J.1. A very unusual situation, though not unfamiliar where public authorities are concerned has arisen in this case which throws up for consideration an issue of far reaching consequence which may be summarised as follows.2. If in a disciplinary proceeding where gross misconduct has been proved against a public servant and an order of dismissal is passed against him, and where the matter goes wholly and completely by default before a Labour Court principally because of the abnormally long efflux of time during which the material witness has retired and is not available, whether the benefit of such default should accrue to the errant employee? In other words, should a public authority be made to pay backwages for 19 1/2 years in the face of a record that would normally justify the disciplinary order, merely because the order was not substantiated before the lower Court or whether, it is essential, in the public interest and for purposes of doing real Justice to mould...
Tag this Judgment!K.P. Shenoy Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-21-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR510; 1996(5)KarLJ227
Rajendra Babu, J.1. This Petition is fifed by a member of the Co-operative Society challenging the validity of Section 28A(2) and Section 29(D) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act ('Act' 'for short). Petitioner contends that the said two provisions are inconsistent with and violative of Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution as they place unreasonable restrictions on the Fundamental Right of the petitioner to form a society and to manage its affairs which is a concomitant right to form a society; that the impugned provisions interfere with the right of representation in the Committee of Management; that Section 28A of the Act places unreasonable restriction in providing for reservations at a particular percentage of the Board of Directors in favour of members who are Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or women; that the society is a voluntary organisation of members and such restriction cannot be placed and no law can be enacted placing such restriction; that the restriction plac...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Sreeshyla Mallikarjuna Rice and Flour Mills Vs. Tahsildar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-20-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR1164; 1995(2)KarLJ297
ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J.1. By these Petitions, the petitioners have sought a Writ of Certiorari for quashing Annexure-A notice dated 21.2.1990, Annexure-B notice dated 22.2.1990 and Annexure-C, notice dated 21.2.1990 issued under the signature of the Tahsildar, requiring the three petitioners in the three Petitions to deposit the market fee, which have been alleged to be for the years 1981-82 and 1982-83 to the tune of Rs. 6375-20 paise from the first petitioner, a tune of Rs. 7937-00 from the second petitioner and a tune of Rs. 5640-00 from the 3rd petitioner.2. The petitioners' cases are that the Tahsildar has no jurisdiction to issue notice in respect of the market fee and the notice issued does not specifically indicate as to which item of agricultural products the market fee is due. Further, it has been stated in the Petition that the notices do not contain the details of the accounts relating to amounts which are sought to be recovered and no notice has been issued by the respo...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Balaji Rice Mill Vs. Agricultural Produce Market Committee
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-19-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR2091; 1994(5)KarLJ306
ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J.1. These are the Petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India whereby the petitioners have claimed issuance of a declaration to the effect that the producers/agriculturists are entitled to process or decorticate their produce before effecting sale of their produce and that the respondent No. 1 has no manner any authority to prevent or obstruct the entry or business or bringing in of the produce within the premises of the petitioners for the purpose of processing of the paddy into rice. The petitioners have prayed for issuance of further direction to respondents that they should not interfere with the processing activity carried on by the petitioners, by preventing any producer or agriculturist from bringing their produce for the said purpose within the premises of the petitioners.2. The petitioners' case in the nutshell is that the petitioner in W.P.14386/88 is carrying on the processing unit which process the notified agricultural produce...
Tag this Judgment!Delhi- Haryana Transport Corporation Vs. Tata Tea Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-19-1994
Reported in: I(1995)ACC486; ILR1995KAR928
ORDERKumar Rajaratnam, J.1. Suits were filed by plaintiffs-1 and 2 against the defendant, the petitioner herein, to recover a certain sum of money. The 1st plaintiff is a Company that is trading in tea and the 2nd plaintiff is an Insurance Company. The defendant/petitioner was carrying on business as a Transport Contractor within the meaning of Carriers Act, 1865. The 1st plaintiff entrusted consignment of tea to the defendant for transportation from Calcutta to Bangalore. The defendant accepted the said consignment. The consignment was also insured with the 2nd plaintiff by the 1st plaintiff. It was noticed that the goods that were delivered were in a damaged condition and also there was some shortage. The Survey Report also gave an opinion that the damage was due to rough handling of the goods in transit. The 1st plaintiff issued notice to the petitioner-defendant and made a claim for the loss sustained by the 1st plaintiff. The defendant did not settle the amount claimed by the 1st ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »