Karnataka Court July 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.
Thuluvanur Venkataramana Vs. Assistant Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-18-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2136; 1994(3)KarLJ76
S.B. Majmudar, C.J. 1. The Appellant is aggrieved by the Order of the learned Single Judge disposing of his Writ Petition on the ground that the impugned order of Assistant Commissioner as per ANNEXURE-C is appealable under Section 5A of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. No doubt it is true that the learned Judge, has referred to Section 5A, as amended by amending Act No. 3/1984, which in substance is Karnataka Act No. 3 of 1984. But that provision would certainly not apply to such a case. In the present case the Appellant who was original grantee had moved the Assistant Commissioner for declaring the Sale Deed entered into by him in favour of Respondent No. 2 to be null and void, being violative of provisions of Section 4(2) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. However, the order of the learned Judge can be sustained on account of the further ...
S. Shivashankar Vs. Commissioner, Corporation of the City of Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-18-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2661; 1994(4)KarLJ1
ORDERHart Nath Tilhari, J.1. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other Writ or order for quashing the endorsement issued by respondent No. 2 - the Assistant Revenue Officer, Shivajinagar Area, Corporation of City of Bangalore, North East Range, bearing No. DA.71/KTR.31/92-93 dated 25-9-92, a copy of which has been annexed to the Petition as Annexure 'C' and declaring the same to be illegal and without jurisdiction. The petitioner has further sought for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to transfer Katha of the property in favour of the petitioner as per his application dated 14-6-90 as per Annexure 'B' to the Writ Petition and for grant of such other reliefs.2. The facts of the case in brief are, that the petitioner claims to have purchased residential site measuring 50' East-West and 30' North-South along with 2 square building situate at No. 10/1, 6th Cross, Vasanthnagar, Cor...
Sumithra K. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-15-1994
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR743]; 1994(3)KarLJ132; (1995)ILLJ242Kant
ORDERKumara Rajarathnam, J.1. This writ petition is taken up for final disposal with the consent of both the parties.2. The short point on which this writ petition can be disposed of is whether the Government can reject the request for reference on the ground that the 2nd respondent would not come within the jurisdiction of the Industrial Disputes Act.3. The Government has gone to the extent of holding that the 2nd respondent is not an industry within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is well-settled law that it is not open to the government to hold as to whether the 2nd respondent is an industry or not and it is entirely within the jurisdiction of the Labour Court.4. In these circumstances, there will be a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to consider afresh the case of the petitioner and to dispose of the application in the light the observations made by me.5. The first respondent will dispose of the application for reference within a period of four weeks f...
Karnataka State Judicial Employees' House Building Co-operative Societ ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-15-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2115; 1994(3)KarLJ124
ORDERShivaprakash, J.1. The petitioner is a House Building Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.2. In this Petition the petitioner-Society questions the legality and validity of the Circular dated 17.5.1994 issued by the second respondent - the Commissioner for Registration and Stamps in Karnataka, copy of which is marked as Annexure-C. In the said Circular, it is stated that the Government has issued instructions to 32 House Building Co-operative Societies to allot sites to its members and that the Government in its letter dated 11.5.1994 has issued instructions to the concerned Sub-Registrars that whenever documents are presented by the aforesaid 32 Co-operative Societies the same shall be registered if only they produce the following documents:1) No objection certificate from Registrar of Co-operative Societies;2) Release certificate from the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA for short)3. In the said Circular there is a ...
K. Lakshminarayana Sastry Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-14-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Kant217; ILR1994KAR2119; 1994(3)KarLJ70
ORDER1. This Revision arises out of an order of the learned Civil Judge at Chinta-mani, rejecting a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acqusition Act by the Assistant Commissioner, Chikkaballpur Sub-Division, on the application filed by the claimant under Section 18 of the Land Acqusition Act. The reference relates to the acquisition of an extent of 2 acres and 20 guntas of land in Sy. No. 3 of Vaizakur Village of Chintamani Taluk. Possession of the land was taken on 21-9-1976 and an Award was passed on 4-7-1977, by which, the land value was fixed at Rs. 1,000/-per acre. The petitioner who is the legal representative of the original claimant, received the compensation under protest on 27-10-1989. He filed an application for a reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act on 18-1-1990 before the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the meatier relating to the valuation of the land to the Civil Judge, Chintamani. The case was referred to the Court on 28-5- 19...
Mysore Surgical Cotton (P.) Ltd. Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corpora ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-13-1994
Reported in: [1999]96CompCas86(Kar)
S.B. Majmudar, C.J.1. We have heard the learned advocates for the parties finally and we are disposing of these appeals which involve common questions, by this judgment. Both these appeals are moved by Mysore Surgical Cottons (Private) Limited (in liquidation), represented by the official liquidator of this court. The common respondent is the Karnataka State Financial Corporation. The Mysore Surgical Cotton Co. (P.) Ltd. was ordered to be wound up by the order of this court dated August 9, 1985, in Company Petition No. 8 of 1984 presented on January 27, 1984. By reason of the provisions of section 449 of the Companies Act, 1956 (the 'Act' for short), the official liquidator attached to this court became the liquidator of the company. The respondent, which is established under section 3 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (for short, 'the SFC Act'), claims that it is a secured creditor of the company in liquidation. The respondent-corporation took out Company Application No. 6...
Mahboob Pasha Vs. A.R. Viswanatha Chetty and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-12-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Kant350; ILR1994KAR2353; 1994(4)KarLJ319
ORDER1. This petition is listed for admission with the consent of the learned counsel appearing on both the sides, the petition is heard on merits and disposed of by this order.2. The defendant in O.S. No. 297/87 on the file of the learned Second Additional Civil Judge, Mysore, is the petitioner herein. He has called in question the judgment and decree dated 9-12-1993 passed by the learned Second Additional Civil Judge, Mysore, in O.S. No. 292/ 87 instituted under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act').3. The plaintiffs-respondents instituted the suit against the petitioner for possession of the premises bearing No. 1739 (New No. 93), Sayyaji Rao Road, Mysore, and for damage for use and occupation of the same. It was contended by the plaintiffs that they are the owners of the suit property and they were in possession of the said property till they were dispossessed by the defendant without their consent, otherwise than in due course of law. It is the cast of t...
Laxminarayan Flour Mills and anr. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commer ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-12-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2216; [1994]95STC612(Kar)
S.B. Majmudar, C.J.1. In these appeals a common order passed by the learned single Judge on June 1.6, 1994 Brindavan Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1994] 95 STC 580 supra, in Writ Petitions Nos. 10924 to 10930 of 1994 amongst others has been brought in challenge. These writ petitioners are having flour mills in the State. Their contention is that under Section 6-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the total turnover of every dealer is liable to turnover tax, but the proviso to the said section, however excludes the turnover relating to several transactions listed therein, from turnover tax. Item (ii) under the proviso excludes the turnover relating to sale or purchase of goods specified in the Fourth Schedule to the Act. Wheat is one of the items listed in the Fourth Schedule to the Act and therefore the turnover relating to wheat is exempted from turnover tax. The respondent-Revenue authorities conside...
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Vs. Wipro Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-11-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2127; 1995(4)KarLJ254; (1996)ILLJ423Kant
H.N. Tilhari, J. 1. This appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act arises out of Judgment and Order dated 17th September, 1993 passed in Writ Petition No. 10424/93 1994 I CLR 53 whereby the learned single Judge of this Court was pleased to allow the writ petition and quash the order dated 15-3-1993 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Karnataka under Section 7-A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts of the case are : That M/s. Margarine and Refined Oil Company Pvt. Ltd., which was closed long back had stopped its operation and stopped its employees completely in 1980 after paying the retrenchment compensation and this closed establishment was purchased by the respondent and according to the respondent it was their new establishment and there was no continuity. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner started proceedings under Section 7-A of the Act and also issued a notice under Secti...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Dharma Gowda Dharma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-1994
Reported in: 1994ACJ1007; ILR1994KAR2282; 1994(3)KarLJ264
ORDERMohan Kumar, J. 1. This is an appeal preferred by the Insurance company against the Award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The learned Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the Appeal. 2. The contention of Mr. Ashok Haranahalli, learned Counsel for the 1st respondent, put across commendably well is that the Appeal will not lie, as the appellant has not complied with the requirement of Third Proviso to Section 30(1) of the Act and, therefore, it has to be rejected and cannot be entertained or admitted for consideration at all. 3. Section 30 of the Act reads thus : '30 APPEALS (a) an appeal shall lie to the High Court from the following orders of a Commissioner namely :- (a) an order awarding as compensation a lumpsum whether by way of redemption of a half monthly payment or otherwise or disallo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »