Karnataka Court March 1994 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.
Shankar Mahadev Sasane Vs. Returning Officer
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR1029; 1994(2)KarLJ514
Vaidyanatha, J1. This Writ Appeal is filed against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court disposing of the Writ Petition with certain observations. One of the observations made by the learned single Judge was that delay can be condoned even if the Election Dispute is filed after the period of limitation. Being aggrieved by this observation the Writ Petitioners have come up with this Appeal.2. Learned Counsel for the appellants has questioned the correctness of the observations made by the learned single Judge. It was argued that the observation of the learned single Judge is erroneous. It was submitted that the delay cannot be condoned so far as Election Disputes are concerned.3. After hearing the learned Counsel for the appellants and after perusing the materials on record and the Law bearing on this point, we find that there is no merit in this Appeal.4. Section 70-A of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, (for short 'the Act') provides for limitation for ail ...
Soma Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR872; 1994(2)KarLJ430
ORDERM. Ramakrishna, J 1. The petitioner in this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has called in question the legality and correctness of the order (Annexure-D) made by the Registrar, respondent-2 herein, in NO.R/SA/2/UG/ADM/88-89 dated 18.7.1990 and sought for quashing the same and for granting consequential reliefs, for the grounds taken in it.2. This Writ Petition came to be referred to the Division Bench on 26.8.1993 by Shivashankar Bhat, J., as he then was, observing in paragraphs 2 and 3 of his order as follows:-'During the final year of B.Sc., course in the second respondent-University the alleged fraud was discovered and ultimately, on an enquiry it was found that the petitioner's father's income was more than the income that would make the petitioner ineligible called as belonging to weaker section (agriculturists in the instant case). Even the assessment order made under the provisions of the Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Act also shows...
Miss. Rafia Shaheen and Etc. Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Kant295; ILR1994KAR753; 1994(2)KarLJ404
ORDERRaveendran, J.1. The common question that arises in these two appeals is whether a student claiming to belong to the Group of 'Darvesu' among Muslims, will be entitled to the benefit of reservation under Article 15(4) of the Constitution provided under Group A of the Government Order No. SWL 66 BCA 86 dated 13-10-1986, only if his parents carry on the occupation denoted by the name 'Darvesu'.2. Admissions to Medical, Engineering and certain other professional courses are regulated by the Karnataka Selection of candidates for admission to Engineering, Medical, Dental, Pharmacy and Nursing Courses Rules, 1993 ('Rules' for short). Rule 12(4) of the said Rules provides that reservations shall be made for the candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Groups A, B, C, D and E in accordance with the order issued in G.O. No. SWL. 66 BCA 86 dated 13-10-1986 and other related orders issued from time to time. Rule 10(3) of the said Rules provides that no candidate seeking re...
Vokkaligara Sangha Vs. Pradeep
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR1653; 1994(2)KarLJ688
R. Ramakrishna, J.1. The appellants are the defendants in O.S.No. 10169/94 on the file of the VIIth Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore. They are questioning the grant of/ad interim order of mandatory injunction granted against them to conduct the election in accordance with Annexure 'D'.2. When this Appeal came up for admission, Sri S. Shekhara Shetty, learned Advocate who represented the respondent before the trial Court made his appearance. At the initial stage, the maintainability of the Appeal is questioned by the respondent and therefore the learned Advocates are permitted to make their representation only with regard to maintainability of Appeal before considering the case for admission.3. Few facts are necessary and they are as follows :The respondent filed a suit for judgment and decree against the appellants for a declaration that Annexures B and F are null and void and issued without any jurisdiction and for a permanent injunctionrestraining the appellants from postponing...
Karnataka Minerals and Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Asstt. C.C. and C.E.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1994
Reported in: 2005(184)ELT356(Kar)
ORDERB. Jagannatha Hegde, J.1. This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr. P.C. praying to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 1318/1989 on the file of the J.M.F.C., Hosadurga, in which these three petitioners have been arraigned as A-1 to A-3.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that the first petitioner is a company and, therefore, process for having committed an offence punishable under Section 9(1)(i) of the Central Excise & Salt Act (for short 'the Act') could not have been issued, relying on a decision in the case of Vijaya Commercial Credit Ltd. v. VI Income Tax Officer (I.L.R. 1987 (3) Kar 2317). In that case, a limited company was accused of the commission of an offence under Section 278B of the Income-Tax Act. It was held, relying on a decision in the case of Kusum v. Sinha ( : [1980]126ITR804(Cal) ) that when the Parliament has prescribed a punishment of compulsory imprisonment for an offence, a company or a juristic person cannot possibly by sent to prison.3...
The Associated Cos. Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-02-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Kant182; ILR1994KAR1059
ORDERRajendra Babu, J.1. This petition is filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution questioning the correctness of an order made in the appeal by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 324 of 1978 affirming an order made by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Gulbarga, who in turn affirmed the order made by the Tahsildar levying certain land revenue in respect of the lands which are in occupation of the petitioner where mining activities are being carried out for the purpose of their cement factory.2. Petitioner's challenge to the demand is principally based on the agreement entered into between the petitioner and His Exalted Highness Nizam of Hyderabad on 18-1-1951. Clause (6) thereof reads as follows:'Clause 6: Royalty. The Company shall pay to Government a royalty of 4 ahrias of the Indian currency per ton of cement manufactured and this royalty shall be in lieu of all quarries and other rights conceded, to the company by the Government. If other articles than cement are manufac...
Karnataka Wine Merchants Association Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-02-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR903; 1994(2)KarLJ570
Rajendra Babu, J 1. These Writ Appeals arise out of a common order made by the learned Single Judge upholding the validity of Rule 5 of the Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules, as amended with effect from 21st June, 1993. We have heard all matters listed before us together, but we are disposing of one set of matters giving detailed reasons while other matters will be disposed of separately by following this order for purpose of convenience.2. The Appellants are licensees in Form No. CL 2 or CL 9 issued under the Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquor) Rules, 1968. The Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules are also applicable to them. Prior to the amendment of the said Rules, Rule 5 of the General Conditions Rules read as follows:'5. Restrictions regarding location of Shops:- (1) The Licensee shall except in Towns and cities .and other places where more than one shop is sanctioned, select a suitable site outside but adjacent to a village for ...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Rukminibai and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1994
Reported in: 1994ACJ811; AIR1995Kant18; ILR1994KAR861; 1994(2)KarLJ138
ORDERRamakrishna, J.1. The appellant-Oriental Insurance Company being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award passed by the M.A;C.T., Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, in M.V.C. 1585/88 on 13-8-1990, has come up before this Court, in these Appeals under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the 'Act').2. The appellant has sought for setting aside the findings recorded by the Tribunal in regard to the liability of the Insurer to make good the compensation, on more than one ground.3. The undisputed facts as borne out of the records are that the tractor and trailor bearing registration No. MEZ 6506 and 6507 respectively belonging to Nanjegowda, one of the respondents herein, dashed against the Scooter from behind on Bangalore-Bellary road on 5-7-1988 at 7.00 a.m. causing injuries to the rider and the pillion rider of the scooter. The rider husband of R-1, succumbed to the injuries, later Rukmini Bai, R-l and her two minor children along with the parents of the dec...
P.C. Dental College, Bangalore Vs. the Dental Council of India, New De ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Kant282; ILR1994KAR1201
ORDER1. This petition relates to regularisation of excess intake in a Dental College.2. The petitioner is a Dental College established by 'P. C. Dental and Nursing College Trust'. The Government of Karnataka granted permission to start the said Dental College from the academic year 1991-92. The Bangalore University (third respondent) by notification dated 11-8-1992 accorded sanction of fresh affiliation for petitioner college for the year 1991-92 and continuation of affiliation for the year 1992-93 to conduct BDS course with an intake of 40 students subject to fulfillment of several conditions stated in the notification, the first of which is that the Management shall obtain approval of the Dental Council of India (First Respondent) immediately. In pursuance of such permission and affiliation, the petitioner established a dental college at an enormous expense with necessary infrastructural facilities. 3. On 22-1-1992 the petitioner applied to the Minister for Health and Family Welfare,...
Dr. N.M. Prasad Vs. Director, Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Kant309; ILR1994KAR1215
ORDER1. The question that arises for consideration in this petition is whether there should be reservation for Scheduled Castes and Tribes, even in regard to Super Speciality/Post-Doctoral Courses in Education.2. The petitioner is the holder of a M.B.B.S. Degree and a Post-Graduate degree in General Medicine, working as a Lecturer with Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology (first respondent), an autonomous Institute. The first respondent is affiliated to Bangalore University and is recognised by Medical Council of India (second respondent). It conducts a Super Speciality/Post-Doctoral Course in Cardioloty, known as D.M. (Cardiology), the intake being three seats. Only persons who hold a M.D. degree in Medicine are eligible to be admitted to D.M. (Cardiology) Course. According to respondents, selection to the post doctoral course is purely on merit in pursuance of an all India Entrance Examination followed by a viva voce.3. The petitioner claims to belong to a Scheduled Caste. He contend...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »