Karnataka Court August 1994 Judgments
State Government Houseless Harijan Employees Association Vs. State of ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-31-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2947; 1995(1)KarLJ67
Ramakrishna, J. 1. The facts and the circumstances and the Question of Law arising in these two Appeals being common, we dispose of them by the following Common Order, referring to the averments stated in W.A.No. 745 of 1994.2. For the sake of convenience, we go by the ranks of the parties in this Appeal.3. Brief facts of the case necessary for the disposal of these Appeals are as follows:-The appellant in both the Appeals is a Society called 'State Government Houseless Harijan Employees Association', Barline Road, Tumkur, registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (the Act for short), the main object of which being to distribute sites to its members by acquiring certain lands. On the recommendation of the District and State Level Acquisition Committee, respondent-1 State acquired in the year 1987 15 acres of land in Sy.No. 49/1 of Maralur village, Kasaba Hobli, Tumkur Taluk under the Notifications under Sections 4(1) and 6(1) of the Land Acquisit...
Tag this Judgment!Jayanagar 4th T Block Residents Association Vs. Gnyana Mandir Trust
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-31-1994
Reported in: ILR1995KAR461
ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J. 1. On 31.8.1994, I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties i.e., Sri C. Lakshminarayana Rao for the petitioner as well as Sri K.S. Desai, Sri H.J. Sunder Kumar and Smt Shobha Patil, Counsel for respondents and thereafter passed the order that:'Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as for the opposite parties, I intend to dismiss the Writ Petition for the detailed reasons to be given later on. Therefore, Writ Petition is hereby dismissed for reasons to be given later on.'2. I proceed to give my reasons along with the facts of the case.3. By this Petition, the petitioner has sought the relief of issuance of appropriate Writ or order or direction declaring the sanctioned plan as per orders of the third respondent dated 21.10.1993 and issued by the 4th respondent under L.P.No. 322/92-93, dated 27.10.1993 valid up to 26.10.1993, as per Annexure-C to the Writ Petition t6 be illegal and inoperative and contrary to law, as well as prayed ...
Tag this Judgment!B. Balachandra Rai Vs. Indian Telephone Industries Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-30-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR3047; 1994(4)KarLJ411
Tirath Singh Thakur, J. 1. The petitioner was arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation, Bangalore on 4th July 1991 in connection with Crime Case No. Re-21(A)/91 for offences punishable under Sections 120-B & 420 of the I PC read with Section 9 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He remained in Police custody till 8th July 1991 i.e., for a period of more than 48 hours. In terms of Rule 22(2) of the Conduct Discipline and Appeal Rules of the respondent Company, the Petitioner was deemed to have been suspended; and a Memo dated 9th of July 1991 issued to him to that effect.2. Some time later, a Charge-sheet was filed by the CBI against the petitioner and three others in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, who by his Order dated 22-2-1993 discharged the petitioner and the other three accused holding that no case was made out by the prosecution to warrant framing of any charge against them. Against this order of discharge a Criminal Review Petition No. 216 of ...
Tag this Judgment!V.K. Gopal Vs. H.M.T. Limited
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-30-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR3018; 1995(1)KarLJ15
Tirath Singh Thakur, J. 1. In this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the validity of an order of dismissal passed against him by the Chairman and the Managing Director of the Respondent-Company and that passed by the Board of Directors dismissing an appeal filed by the petitioner against the same. The petitioner has also prayed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to reinstate him against the post originally held by him with continuity of service and payment of salary and allowances etc.2. A few facts necessary for the disposal of this Petition may be stated first:The petitioner was at the relevant time working as the Joint General Manager of H.M.T. Factory-I and II at Bangalore. Being qualified to get a motor car advance for the purchase of a Motor Car, the petitioner made a request for such an advance, which request was granted and a loan of Rs. 45,000/- sanctioned by the competent authority in his favour. The petitioner dr...
Tag this Judgment!Mallappa Sangappa Desai Vs. Laxmanappa Basappa Whoti
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-29-1994
Reported in: [1998]92CompCas337(Kar); ILR1994KAR2689; 1994(4)KarLJ356
S. Venkataraman, J.1. These two petitions are directed against the order of the J.M.F.C., Muddebihal, in C.C. Nos. 243 of 1992 and 596 of 1992, respectively, directing issue of process against the petitioner, who is common in both the cases, and for quashing the entire proceedings. 2. The respondent who is common in both the cases has filed two complaints before the magistrate for offences under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('the Act', for short). The respondent's case is that the petitioner who was due in a sum of Rs. 50,000 issued one cheque dated September 30, 1991, for a sum of Rs. 10,000 and another cheque for Rs. 40,000 dated May 2, 1992, in respect of that liability, that when both the cheques were presented for encashment they were returned with an endorsement of insufficiency of funds, that the respondent issued notices to the petitioner demanding the payment and that in spite of the service of the notice, the petitioner failed to pay amounts covered by ...
Tag this Judgment!Basappa Sangappa Kori Vs. Nenamall
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-29-1994
Reported in: I(1995)ACC266; 1995ACJ536; ILR1994KAR3406; 1995(1)KarLJ144
M. Ramakrishna, J1. These five Appeals arise out of the common judgment and award passed on 3-1-1985 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-ll, Bijapur, in M.V.C.Nos. 1, 13, 14, 2 and 15 of 1984 respectively, fixing the liability of making good the compensation awarded to the claimants on the appellant herein and one Ahamrnad, owner and the driver of the tempo bearing registration No. MXI 569 respectively, involved in the accident that took place on 11-11-83 at about 6-45 A.M. on Bijapur Sholapur Road near Badrekar Police Quarters, First Gate, Bijapur, resulting in the death of Sumitra Bai wife of claimant-1 in M.V.C.No. 1 of 1984 (M.F.A.No.660 of 1985) aqd injuries to the claimants in the other cases.2. There were five Claim Petitions before the Tribunal for compensation for the death and injuries suffered in the accident. The claims were opposed by the appellant - insured, the insurer and the driver of the vehicle in question. On the completion of the pleadings, the learned Member of...
Tag this Judgment!United Breweries Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and Oth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR3441; [1995]211ITR256(KAR); [1995]211ITR256(Karn)
S. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. These two petitions are filed by a company, who is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). Several payments are made by the petitioner such as salaries, interest, etc. The said deductions were being credited to the account of the Income tax Officer, Company Ward No. 4(1), Bangalore. The petitioner claims that in respect of tax deducted at source (TDS), jurisdiction had been conferred upon the Income-tax Officer, Company Ward No. 4(1), Bangalore, by the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (Karnataka, Goa and Kerala), Bangalore, by his order dated May 31, 1989. The annual return which is required to be furnished under the Act in respect of tax deducted at source were also furnished to the Income-tax Officer, Company Ward No. 4(1), Bangalore. 2. By a letter sent on February 11, 1993, to the petitioner on its failure to deduct tax at source for the guarantee commission credited to the account of Sri Vijay Mallya, director, for the year 1990-9...
Tag this Judgment!H.V. Venkatesh Vs. Election Officer 2835
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2835; 1994(4)KarLJ680
ORDERSadashiva, J1. This Petition is listed for admission after notice to the respondents; 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 petitioner in Election Misc.6/94 on the file of the learned Munsiff, at Mulbagal is the Revision petitioner in this Petition. This Revision is directed against the order dated 7-6-1994 passed by the learned Munsiff, Mulbagal dismissing the Election Petition under Section 17 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act') for non-compliance with Sub-section (3) of Section 15 of the Act. The learned Munsiff dismissed the Election Petition as not maintainable on the ground that the election petitioner has failed to attest the copies of the Election Petition as true copy of the Petition.3. Sri G. Papireddy, the learned Counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 5 in addition to objections on merits, has raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainab...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hazira Begum and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-26-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ236
V.P. Mohan Kumar, J.1. These appeals arise out of a claim preferred by the legal heirs of a workman who died in the course of his employment. M.F.A. No. 1155 of 1992 is preferred by the insurance company disowning its liability whereas M.F.A. No. 1333 of 1992 is preferred by the legal heirs of the deceased workman claiming enhancement.2. The deceased workman was employed as a driver by the employer to drive his vehicle. While he was driving an Alwyn Nissan vehicle CAK 2839 belonging to the employer on 27.1.1989, it was involved in an accident resulting in his death. This fact is admitted. The legal heirs claimed that he was earning wages at Rs. 1,000/- per month and batta at Rs. 20/- per day. Compensation was claimed on the said basis. The claim petition was preferred on 26.7.1989 before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. The claimants claimed a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation.3. While the employment of the worker was admitted, the main contest was whether the driver wa...
Tag this Judgment!Jabhiulla Vs. the Chief Engineer Karnataka Electricity Board and Anoth ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-25-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2622; 1994(4)KarLJ278
Ramakrishna, J.1. The complainant Jabhiulla invoking the provisions of Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (the Act for short), has sought to punish the respondents-accused 1 and 2 for the reasons set out in the complaint.2. A few facts that are necessary for the disposal of this petition, are as follows :-The complainant filed W.P. No. 2976 of 1992 seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider his case for offering him a post in the Karnataka Electricity Board, (hereinafter called the Board) on compassionate ground, on the ground that his father Dastagir who had been serving as an employee of the Board in Chickmagalur Division died on 4-9-1989 in harness while on duty leaving behind him the members of his family consisting of his wife and eight children and that his application for appointment on compassionate ground came to be rejected by the Board though he was entitled to the appointment under the sche...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »