Karnataka Court February 1996 Judgments
Javid Ahmed Shah and Etc. Vs. Principal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Medical Col ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR2434; 1996(3)KarLJ603
ORDER1. This set of five petitions relate to an Order of rustication passed by the Principal of the Dr. B.R. Ambedkar College, Bangalore against the five petitioners on 20-11-1995. The petrs, are all Medical Students prosecuting their studies with the college in question and the Respondent Principal had passed the order on the ground that the petrs, have involved themselves in serious acts of misconduct/indiscipline. There are certain other proceedings that have been instituted against these petrs, with which we are not immediately concerned. The issues involved in this case are of deep significance in so far as they concern two vital areas the first of them being the question as to what should be the attitude or role of the Courts in cases relating to action that follows proven misconduct and secondly, certain aspects of priority in so far as whether at all the Courts should interfere in these cases and in those of the ones where the Court is required to take judicial notice, what pre...
Tag this Judgment!Cigimol Varghese and Others, Etc. Vs. the Secretary, Dept. of Health a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Kant196; ILR1996KAR2667; 1997(1)KarLJ627
ORDER1. I have heard the learned advocates who represent the petitioners as also the learned Government Advocate. It has been pointed out to the Court that there are 4 more writ petitions which are pending and which have not been listed today, but the papers have been called for from the Office and the same are treated as having been listed with the present group. This order will cover the entire group of petitions.2. The common point involved in this group of writ petitions is as to whether the Vocational Courses which the petitioners have done in Kerala and in respect of which the Board of Vocational Higher Secondary Examinations, Government of Kerala had Conducted the examinations can be treated as equivalent to the Course of this State. The question has arisen because the petitioners joined the institutes in Bangalore for the purpose of doing their General Nursing Course in the State and as inevitably happens, when the question of the first set of examinations came up, the matter c...
Tag this Judgment!Satyanarayana Gowda Vs. B. Rangappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: [1998]93CompCas953(Kar); ILR1996KAR1219; 1996(2)KarLJ162
M.P. Chinnappa, J. 1. This petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the order dated December 14, 1995, passed by the IXth Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, in C.C. No. 20530 of 1995 rejecting the application filed under section 258, Criminal Procedure Code, to stop further proceedings. 2. Briefly stated, the facts necessary for disposal of this petition are that the respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner under section 200, Criminal Procedure Code, on the allegation that a cheque for a sum of Rs. 35,800, dated November 1, 1994, drawn on Karnataka State Co-operative Bank Ltd., Banashankari Branch, Bangalore, was issued in favour of the complainant by the accused. The said cheque was dishonoured by the bank when presented with an endorsement by the Bank 'insufficient funds', on March 24, 1995. After issuing a notice as contemplated under section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, 'the Act') the complain...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Satyanarayana Gowda Vs. V.B. Rangappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: [1997]88CompCas433a(Kar); 1996CriLJ2264
ORDER1. This petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dt. 14-12-95 passed by the IX Addl. C.M.M., Bangalore, in C.C. No. 20530/95 rejecting the application filed u/S. 258 Cr.P.C. to stop further proceedings. 2. Briefly stated facts necessary for disposal of this petition are that the respt. filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 200 Cr.P.C. on the allegation that a cheque for a sum of Rs. 35,800/- dt. 1-11-94 drawn on Karnataka State Co-op. Bank Ltd., Banashankari Branch, Bangalore, was issued in favour of the complainant by the accused. The said cheque was dishonored by the bank when presented with an endorsement by the bank 'insufficient funds', on 24-3-95. After issuing a notice as contemplated u/S. 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the Act'), the complainant lodged a complaint to punish the accused under Sec. 138 of the Act. The learned Magistrate, after taking cognizance of the case & recording the sworn statement, being sati...
Tag this Judgment!Javid Ahmed Shah Vs. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Medical College, Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Kant122; (1997)IILLJ239Kant
ORDER1. This set of five petitions relate to an order of rustication passed by the Principal of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar College, Bangalore against the six petitioners on November 20, 1995. The petitioners are all Medical Students prosecuting their studies with the college in question and the respondent - Principal had passed the order on the ground that the petitioners have involved themselves in serious act of misconduct/indisclpline. There are certain other proceedings that have been instituted against these petitioners with which we are not immediately concerned. The issues involved in this case are of deep significance insofar as they concern two vital areas the first of them being the question as to what should be the attitude or role of the Courts in cases relating to action that follows proven misconduct and secondly, certain aspects of priority insofar as whether at all the Courts should interfere in these cases and in those of the ones where the Court is required to take judicial n...
Tag this Judgment!Canara Bank Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR810; 1996(40)KarLJ467
M.L. Pendse, C.J.1. An Interesting question as to whether a banking company under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, can be treated as a 'dealer' under section 2(1)(k) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, while realising the security, falls for determination in this appeal preferred by a nationalised bank. The facts which gave rise to the filing of this appeal, are not in dispute and are required to be briefly stated to appreciate the claim of the appellant-bank.The appellant is a Government of India undertaking which was acquired by the Government of India under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. The business of the appellant-bank is regulated under the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The expression 'banking' is defined under section 5(b) and means the accepting, for the purpose of lending or investment, of deposits of money from the public, repayable on demand or otherwise, and withdrawable by cheque, draft, order or otherwise....
Tag this Judgment!C.B. Ranganathan Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR1740; 1996(3)KarLJ408
ORDERTirath Singh Thakur, J.1. 'You are upon consideration found unsuitable for Promotion' - is what the Respondent - Bank has conveyed to the Petitioner by the intimation sent by it and brought under challenge in this Writ Petition. The Petitioner has claimed a certiorari quashing the intimation, as if it were an order which proprio vigore turned down his claim albeit unfairly from his stand point. Hyper technicalities as to the form of the petition for a change took the back seat while the learned Counsel on both the sides addressed their arguments on the substance of the matter namely - was the consideration accorded to the petitioner's case in any way defective or vitiated by any flaw - legal or procedural?2. The petitioners started his career as a Clerk in the Respondent-Bank but soon thereafter entered the Officers Cadre as Sub-Accountant in the year 1967. He was promoted as Officer Grade -I with effect from 1.4.1973, which post was later re-designated as MMG Scale - I with effec...
Tag this Judgment!Monika Pahwa Vs. Director of Medical Education
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR845; 1996(6)KarLJ365
ORDERBharuka, J.1. These Writ Petitions have been filed by 15 students who claim to have been admitted by the respondent Bangalore Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Bangalore (hereinafter in short 'the College') to the BDS Course during the academic year 1994-95. They have approached this Court for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents Director of Medical Education, the Bangalore University and the State Government to approve the admissions of these Petitioners in the first year BDS course as accorded by the College under the purported Management quota, since the respondent University under its communication dated 17.10.1995 (Annexure R-2 to the University's Statement of Objection) has refused to approve their admissions on the ground that the respondent Director of Medical Education has held these admissions in excess of the sanctioned intake under the Management.2. The rights of College Managements to admit students are governed by the provisions of the Ka...
Tag this Judgment!Director, Centre for Social and Cultural Action Vs. Regional Transport ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR1462; 1996(3)KarLJ281
ORDERBharuka, J. 1. Petitioners are owners of Omni buses. As such they are liable to pay tax under Section 3 of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 ('the Act' for short) read with Item No. 8 of Part-A of the Schedule to the Act. By Karnataka Act 14 of 1989, the measure for determination of tax liability in cases of Omni buses was changed from seating capacity to the floor area. Constitutional validity of the said amendment was upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of GAJANANA MOTOR TRANSPORT LIMITED v. STATE OF KARNATAKA, : AIR1991Kant40 . The said Judgment was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4728-75/90 disposed of on 22.11.1991. Accordingly, the authorities under the Act measured the floor area of the vehicles in question and raised the impugned demands.2. Petitioners have challenged the said determination and assessment of tax by asserting that the tax can be levied with reference to only such portion of the floor area of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Lalitha Bai Vs. City Corporation of Gulbarga and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR2421; 1996(3)KarLJ285
A.B. Murgod, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for (a) quashing the Sale Deed executed in favour of the fourth respondent with registration No. 3843/1995-96 dated 30-11-1995 at Annexure-C as void and (b) a direction to the respondents not to change the nature of the land and consequential reliefs.2. The contention of the petitioner is that she is the tenant of Survey Number 21, measuring 12 acres 10 guntas in Badepur village and has been cultivating the same with possession. According to the petitioner, her petition for occupancy rights was dismissed by the Land Tribunal and the dispute is pending before this Court in Civil Petition No. 3340 of 1991. Petitioner has alleged that the portion measuring 200' X 100' from this land has been illegally and arbitrarily sold by the first respondent in favour of the fourth respondent at an upset price and that the first respondent is not competent to dispose of any portion of the said land and it has no rights over the same. The sale is contended to...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »