Karnataka Court September 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.
Navodaya Education Trust Vs. State of of Karnataka and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Kant98
ORDER1. This Writ Petition is to quash the order dated 19/21-3-1994 Annexure 'D' and order dated 7-5-1994 Annexure 'E' issued by the second respondent University rejecting the eligibility and Admission of 20 students to the I Year B.Sc., Nursing Course for the academic year 1993-94 in their College.2. The petitioner is an Educational Trustwhich is running number of educational Institutions. In order to start the B.Sc., Nursing Course, the petitioner made an application to the respondents for grant of affiliation to start the above Course from the academic year 1993-94. On the said application, the second respondent University made a recommendation to the State Government by a letter dated 1-4-1993 to grant permission to the petitioner Trust to start B.Sc., Nursing Course from the academic year 1993-94. On the basis of the above recommendation the first respondent Government has passed an order evidenced by Annexure 'A' dated 17-9-1993 according sanction to the petitioner to start a Col...
M. Subramanya Shastri and Etc. Vs. Dr. Chandrasekhara Shastri and Othe ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-07-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Kant115; ILR1994KAR3002; 1994(5)KarLJ196
ORDER1. In C.R.P. No. 4937 of 1990 the petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 440 of 1986 and first respondent in Arbitration Case. The respondents 1 to 19 are the defendants in the suit and parties to the arbitration proceedings.2. The petitioners and the respondents in C.R.P. No. 1627 of 1992 are more or less the same parties in O.S. No. 440 of 1986. This Revision Petition is against the order passed by the learned District Judge, Mangalore (DK) in Misc. Petition No. 33 of 1990. The said Miscellaneous Petition was filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') to withdraw the suit in O.S. No. 615 of 1989 which was filed for dissolution and accounting for profits and assets of the partnership firm called M/s. M. V. Shastri and Sons and to transfer it to the file of the 11 Additional Civil Judge, Mangalore for trial along with O.S. No. 440 of 1986 which suit is the subject matter in C.R.P. No. 4937 of 1990. The learned District Judge in h...
Executive Engineer Vs. B.T. Patil and Sons
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-07-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2888; 1994(4)KarLJ641
R. Ramakrishna, J1. The Executive Engineer, Tilari Dam Division, Belgaum, has filed this Appeal through the Government Advocate questioning the validity and correctness of the order passed by the Principal Civil Judge, Belgaum, in Arbitration Case No. 1 of 1988. By this order, the learned trial Judge has held that Clause 30 of the Agreement which was entered between the appellant and respondent in respect of the work of 'A tunnel on Power Canal in K.M.No. 13' is an Arbitration Clause and therefore, the dispute is entitled to be referred to an Arbitrator suggested by the parties.2. To appreciate the order of the trial Court and Clause 30 of the Agreement, narration of few facts of the case is necessary and they are as follows:-3. The respondent was a contractor for the construction of dams, tunnels etc. His tender for the work of a tunnel on power canal was opened on 11-2-1980. He has also submitted revised rates on 24-3-1980. Having accepted his tender, an agreement was entered between...
Management of State Bank of India Vs. V.M. Mahapurush
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-06-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2728; 1994(4)KarLJ689; (1995)ILLJ644Kant
Hari Nath Tilhari, J1. This Appeal has been filed by the Management of the State Bank of India, under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, challenging the Judgment and Order dated 19-7-1994, passed by the learned single Judge of this Court whereby the learned single Judge has been pleased to dismiss the Writ Petition filed by the present appellant-Bank.2. We have heard the learned. Counsel for the appellant and before recording our reasons for dismissing the Appeal, a few facts need to be mentioned.3. The petitioner-appellant by Writ Petition under Article 226 assailed the order awarding unpaid wages to the extent of Rs. 8,000/- to the respondent passed by the Industrial Tribunal dated 30-5-1994, vide Annexure-A to the Writ Petition. The respondent No. 1 according to the facts appearing from record was working as temporary watchman with the appellant from 1977. Thereafter on 4-3-86 his services were terminated. The respondent thereafter approached the Assistant Labour Commissione...
Satischandra and Co. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Asst ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-02-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2716
S.B. Majmudar, C.J.1. In this writ appeal the assesses writ petitioner has brought in challenge the order passed by the learned single Judge. 2. A few facts leading to this petition are required to be noted at the outset : The appellant is an excise contractor. He is also a registered dealer under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as 'the Act'). The appellant being aggrieved by the vires of the provisions of section 6B of the Act, along with others, had filed a writ petition before the honourable Supreme Court in W.P. Nos. 4227 to 4255 of 1982. The Supreme Court, while issuing notice to the respondents granted an ex parte interim order. The interim order dated June 15, 1982, of the Supreme Court permitted the authorities under the Act to complete the assessments and issue demand notice but restrained the authorities from resorting to recovery proceedings under the Act. The said interim order reads as under : 'Pending notices, it shall b...
Basappa Shivalingappa Revadigar Vs. Karnataka Bank Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-02-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR3010
G.C. Bharuka, J. 1. The plaintiff is the appellant. He has lost in both the Courts below. The substantial question of law as arising in this Appeal is as to whether the conveyance dated 29.1.1964 under Ex. D-2, between the parties is a mortgage by conditional sale or a sale with a condition of repurchase.2. Plaintiff had a loan account with the respondent Bank having an outstanding loan of Rs. 10,995.24 as on 29.1.1962. The plaintiff mortgaged the suit property in favour of the Bank by way of security as per Ex-D1 with an undertaking to clear the loan within 2 years. As on 29.1.1964, the balance due from the plaintiff to the Bank was Rs. 10,000/-. Since he could not pay the debt, he entered into a transaction as evidenced by the document Ex.D-2 for a consideration of Rs. 13,000/- with the respondent-Bank out of which Rs. 10,000/-was adjusted against the existing loan and Rs. 3,000/- was paid to the plaintiff in cash. The plaintiff apparently intended to sell the suit property to the de...
Steel Suppliers Vs. Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Admn.)
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-02-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR3175
Majmudar, C.J.1. These three Appeals under Section 16 of Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act,.1979 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are taken out by an assessee M/s. Steel Suppliers, being aggrieved by identical orders dated 22.7.1993, passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration), Bangalore Sub-Division, Bangalore in No. SMR.KTEG.187/89-90, SMR.KTEG,188/89-90 and SMR.KTEG.189/89-90. All these three orders are passed under Section 15(1) of the Act, though wrongly mentioned as orders under Section 16(1) of the Act. T.A.(ET) 10/94 is concerned with period of assessment from 16.11.1982 to 3.11.1983, TA(ET) 11/94 concerns the period of assessment from 1.4.1982 to 15.11.1982 and TA(ET) 12/94 concerns period of assessment from 4.11.1983 to 23.10.1984. By the orders under appeal, assessment orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, 26th Circle, Bangalore in the case of the appellant for the concerned periods have been revised by the revisio...
Steel Suppliers Vs. Jt. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Admn.)
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-02-1994
Reported in: [2003]133STC444(Kar)
S.B. Majmudar, C.J.1. These three appeals under the Section 16 of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are taken out by an assessee M/s. Steel Suppliers, being aggrieved by identical orders dated July 22, 1993, passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration), Bangalore sub-division, Bangalore in No. SMR. KTEG. 187/89-90, SMR. KTEG. 188/89-90 and SMR. KTEG. 189/89-90. All these three orders are passed under Section 15(1) of the Act, though wrongly mentioned as orders under Section 16(1) of the Act. T.A. (ET) 10 of 1994 is concerned with period of assessment from November 16, 1982 to November 3, 1983, T.A. (ET) 11 of 1994 concerns the period of assessment from April 1, 1982 to November 15, 1982 and T.A. (ET) 12 of 1994 concerns period of assessment from November 4, 1983 to October 23, 1984. By the orders under appeal, assessment orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, 26th Circle, Bangalore in ...
Basavaraj Vs. Kajjari Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-01-1994
Reported in: ILR1994KAR2709; 1995(1)KarLJ44
S.B. Majmudar, C.J.1. There is no substance in this Writ Appeal. The appellant who was respondent-5 in the Writ Petition was inducted as President of the Managing Committee of a reconstituted Co-operative Society on amalgamation of two Societies. He was inducted pursuant to the order dated 21-4-1994 - Annexure-E to the Writ Petition. That order is passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Belgaum Sub-Division, Belgaum. It appears to have been passed in purported exercise of powers under Section 14-A of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act'). This order was challenged in Writ Petition by respondent-1 - Co-operative Society. The challenge was mounted on various grounds. One contention was that the Managing Committee's term was for three years, and it was constituted on 30th March 1991. By virtue of an order issued under Section 14-A of the Act, the erstwhile Societies were required to be amalgamated. The said provision reads as under:'14-A. Po...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›