Karnataka Court February 1994 Judgments
M/S. Veneer Mills Vs. the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Kant104; ILR1994KAR735
ORDERS. B. Majmudar, CJ.1. There is no substance in this appeal. The appellant-assesses had brought certain goods within the municipal limits of Mysore Corporation and the question was whether these goods were liable to bear entry tax. The appellant's submission was that it has purchased these goods from a factory which is situated within the Corporation limits of Mysore; therefore no entry tax is liable to be paid so far as these goods are concerned. That was not accepted by the assessing authority -- the Additional Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Assessments) Mysore. But the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Mysore Division, Mysore, who heard the appeal of the assessee took the view that M/s. Wood Resins, Mysore, from whom goods are purchased by the assessee is found to be situated within the local limits of Mysore Corporation and hence the exemption was allowed on the said purchases on the plea that the said purchases are made within the local limits of ...
Tag this Judgment!Veneer Mills Vs. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Mysore Z ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-1994
Reported in: ILR1993KAR735
S.B. Majmudar, C.J.1. There is no substance in this appeal. The appellant-assesses had brought certain goods within the municipal limits of Mysore Corporation and the question was whether these goods were liable to bear entry tax. The appellant's submission was that it has purchased these goods from a factory which is situated within the Corporation limits of Mysore; therefore no entry tax is liable to be paid so far as these goods are concerned. That was not accepted by the assessing authority - the Additional Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Assessments), Mysore. But the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Mysore Division, Mysore, who heard the appeal of the assessee took the view that M/s. Wood Resins, Mysore, from whom goods are purchased by the assessee, is found to be situated within the local limits of Mysore Corporation and hence the exemption was allowed on the said purchases on the plea that the said purchases are made within the local limits of Myso...
Tag this Judgment!Narayanaswamy Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR817
ORDERVenkataraman, J. 1. The petitioner is the owner of Survey Nos. 48 to 51, 62, 63 and 67 to 71 of Nimbekayipura village. Some of these lands are leased and some are mortgaged by the petitioner to the second respondent for running a Stud Farm known as 'Clive Stud Farm'. On the advent of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in the present form with effect from 1.3.1974, the second respondent filed Form No. 7 before the Land Tribunal, however, making it clear in the said Form that the said lands are being used as stud farm for breeding, rearing and maintenance of horses and allied purposes referred to in Rule 38-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).The petitioner applied to the Government to approve the stud farm under the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The Government called for a report from the Special Deputy Commissioner. He stated that the stud farm is in existence since 1967 duly registered with Royal Wes...
Tag this Judgment!B. Krishnappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-15-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR962; 1994(2)KarLJ680
ORDERShivaprakash, J 1. The petitioners were the owners of the lands in question. The said lands were acquired for formation of a residential layout by the 4th respondent Co-operative Society. The possession of the lands has been taken and delivered to the 4th respondent and as on today the ownership of the lands vests in the 4th respondent-Society.2. The membership of the said Society is open only to the employees of the Railway Mail Service and Telephone Wings of P & T Department, as stated by the petitioner.3. In these Petitions, the petitioners allege that even though the lands were acquired for formation of layout and allotment of sites to the members of the said Society, the Management of the said Society has been allotting sites to members, who are not employees of R.M.S. and Telephone Wings of P & T. It is also alleged that the Management of the Society has been alloting sites even to non-members.4. Sri Vijaya Shankar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted th...
Tag this Judgment!Sapan Shankar Vs. Director of Technical Education
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-14-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR611; 1994(2)KarLJ14
S.B. Majmudar, C.J.1. The appellant was the Writ Petitioner before the learned Single Judge. He has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the order rendered by the learned Single Judge on 29.11.1993 dismissing his Writ Petition. For the sake of convenience we will refer to the appellant as the petitioner and the respondents as the original respondents in later part of this Judgment.2. The petitioner is a student who has completed second year Pre-University Course. He sought for admission to medical course in -the State of Karnataka for the year 1993-94, under reserved category as made available under Rule 12 of the Karnataka Selection of the candidates for admission to Engineering, Medical, Pharmacy, Dental, and Nursing Courses, Rules 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'), These Rules are promulgated by the State of Karnataka and they govern such admissions.3. The petitioner's case is that he falls in the reserved category, being a candidate who possessed 'B' Certificate under N...
Tag this Judgment!Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Ramachander
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-11-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR630; 1994(2)KarLJ462
Vasanthakumar, J.1. These Appeals arise out of awards passed by the Court of the Civil Judge, Bidar, in LA.C.Nos.562/1986 and L.A.C. 566/86.2. The Point that arises for Consideration in these Appeals is whether the Court was justified in passing an award in respect of the references made under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')?3. Few facts to briefly state are:- Certain awards were passed pertaining to respective lands covered under different preliminary notifications, by the L.A.O. and on a reference made under Section 18 of the Act, the Reference Court enhanced the award amounts passed by the L.A.O. The details of the References are mentioned in Tabular statement:-CaseNosLACCourt awardedRs. peracreSy,No.Date ofawardbyCourtPrl.NotificationL.A.O'sawardP.A.Date of applicationu/s. 18 filedbefore L.A.O.26/744.000/-19827.7.8211.3.713000/-4-3-85 inLAC.562/86M.F. A. 1767/8966/67 8/773.500/-11,12 &1419.4.8320.9.73733.647.3.85 inLAC. 564/8654/81 89/...
Tag this Judgment!Bank of India, Regional Office, Bangalore Vs. D. Padmanabhudu and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(2)KarLJ425; (1995)ILLJ233Kant
ORDERC. Shivappa, J. 1. Petitioner herein is a nationalised Bank having one of its regional office at Bangalore. The first respondent was working as a cashier-cum-accounts clerk in the Koppal Branch of the petitioner-Bank. He was dismissed from service vide order dated 31-3-1990 for serious acts of misconduct committed by him in the course of his duties as a cashier. The first respondent thereafter raised an industrial dispute regarding his dismissal from service and a reference was made on 28-10-1991 for adjudication to respondent No. 2. The second respondent set aside the dismissal of the first respondent and directed reinstatement with continuity of service and with backwages but denied two future increments with cumulative effect. Further directed the petitioner not to take into account the period of absence of the first respondent from duty from the date he was placed under suspension till his reinstatement for he purpose of earning increment. 2. The first respondent joined the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Airbus Industrie Vs. Laura Howell Linton
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR1370; 1994(5)KarLJ63
R. Ramakrishna, J.1. The appellant - Airbus Industrie is a groupment D'lnterest created under the Laws of France engaged in the business of manufacturing passenger and cargo aircraft since 1969. The first aircraft manufactured by them was called Airbus A-300, The second aircraft called A-320 was introduced later and was supplied to various renowned Airlines all over the world.2. Respondent No. 10, the Indian Airlines Corporation purchased about 20 aircrafts A-320. One such aircraft purchased by respondent No. 10 was an aircraft bearing registration VT-EPN. On 14.2.1990 this aircraft bearing registration VT-EPN was a schedule passenger flight from Bombay to Bangalore being flight No. IC 605. In the course of this flight while attempting to land at Bangalore Air Port at 13-03 hours contacted ground approximately 2,300 feet before the beginning of runway No. 09 within the boundary of Golf Association and immediately thereafter hit the embankment which was the boundary wall of the Golf Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Balakrishna Tuljansa Magaji Kondi and Others Vs. State of Karnataka an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Kant344; ILR1994KAR768; 1994(3)KarLJ470
ORDERRaveendran, J. 1. In this petition, the constitutional validity of sub-section (5) of Section 11 of the Karnataka MunicipalCorporations Act, 1976 ('the Act' for short) is challenged. Section 11 deals with the constitution of Standing Committees and subsection (5) prescribes the term of office of the members of the Standing Committees as oneyear from the date of their election.2. Second respondent is the Corporation established for the City of Hubli Dharwad (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'). At the elections to the three Standing Committees held on 30-6-1992. first petitioner was elected as a member of Standing Commitee of Public Health; Second and third petitioners. were elected as members of Taxation and Finance committee and the fourth petitioner was elected as a member of Works Committee. At the elections to elect Chairman of the said three committees, petitioners 1, 2 and 4 were respectively elected Chairman of the said Committees.3. Respondents 5, 6 and 7 are the...
Tag this Judgment!B.V. Gopalakrishna Rao Vs. P. Susheela Bai
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-1994
Reported in: I(1995)DMC12
B.N. Krishan, J.1. The petitioner herein was the respondent in Crl. Mis. No. 47 of 1982 on the file of Addl. J.M.F.C., Bhadravathi. That was a case instituted by the respondent herein for grant of maintenance to her and her son under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate held that she was entitled to claim separate maintenance and directed the petitioner herein to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs. 400/-, with effect from January, 1989. This order of the learned Magistrate was challenged by the petitioner herein in Criminal Revision Petition No. 28 of 1990 and by the party in whose favour the order of maintenance was passed in Crl. Rev. Petition No. 166/1989. Both these revision petitions came to be disposed of by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Shimoga, by a common order dated 1-2-1992. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed Crl. Rev. Petition No. 28 of 1990 and allowed in part the other (Crl. R.P. No. 166/1989) revision petition and directed that the maintenance of Rs. 400/- per month awa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »