Karnataka Court September 1996 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.
State of Goa and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-04-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Kant161
ORDER1. The First Petitioner is the State of Goa. Second Petitioner is the authorised agent and sole distributor of the First Petitioner, for marketing the lotteries organised by First Petitioner. 2. First Petitioner organises two types of lotteries under the Goa State Lottery Rules, 1991. The first is the conventional/traditional lottery, known as open number tickets, wherein the lottery tickets are sold to participants and the winning tickets are drawn from the pool of tickets offered for sale. In this scheme, the sale of open number tickets concludes before the lottery draw is actually held. The second is known as instant lottery, where the sale of tickets commences only after declaration of the results and continues till the last date fixed by the Director of State Lotteries. These Petitions relate to the legality of Instant Lotteries and the right of the State of Karnataka (first Respondent) to prohibit the sale of tickets under such Instant Lottery Scheme organised by another Sta...
Bowring Institute Vs. Florale (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-04-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR364
S. Venkataraman, J.1. Though this matter has come up for admission, as the lower Court records have been secured and the point involved is short, the matter is heard on merits by consent.2. The parties will be referred to by the rank they held in the lower Court.3. The respondent has filed a suit for declaration that the letter written by the defendant dated 9.1.1996 is null and void and the same is not binding on the plaintiff-company for a direction to the defendant to allow the plaintiff-company to enjoy the status as the corporate member of the defendant and allow the plaintiff to make the subscription as and when intimated by the defendant. Along with the plaint, the plaintiff also sought for an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant from preventing the plaintiff from using the facilities available to a corporate member of the defendant-club pending disposal of the suit.4. It is not disputed that the plaintiff became a corporate member of the defendant-institute b...
Shri Saunsthan Mahabaleshwar Dev Gokarn Vs. the Charity Commissioner a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-04-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR1874
ORDERTirath S. Thakur, J. 1. This Writ Petition calls in question an order dated 3-10-1988 issued by the Charity Commissioner, Belgaum reducing the seva fees prescribed for performance of sevas in the Sri Saunsthan Mahabaleshwar Dev, Temple at Gokarna.2. Sri Saunsthan Mahabaleshwar Dev, temple is a venerated and popular place of pilgrimages in this country. The temple is a public Trust governed by the Bombay Public Trust Act which continues to remain in force in the Bombay Karnataka areas of the present State of Karnataka. The affairs of the Trust are managed by a committee of Trustees appointed for the purpose.3. Sevas (Prayers & Services) are performed in the temple by devotees on payment of certain fees prescribed by the Charity Commissioner. Pursuant to a proposal sent by the Managing Trustee of the Trust, the Chanty Commissioner by his order dated 29-5-1988 enhanced the rates for different sevas performed in the temple from those that were prevalent since the year 1979. Representa...
Kariyappa @ Kariyappa Vs. the A.C. Hassan and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-04-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR1723
ORDERP. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. This petition is directed against the order dated 25th September, 1989, passed by the second respondent confirming the order dated 3rd August, 1989 passed by the first respondent rejecting the application of the petitioner filed under Section 5(1) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), seeking for declaration that the sale of the land measuring 277 7/9 Sq. Yards in Veeranahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Hassan Taluk made by the petitioner to the third respondent by means of registered sale deed dated 31.11.1970 and subsequent sale of the said land made by the third respondent in favour of the 5th respondent as null and void. Copies of the order passed by respondents 1 and 2 have been produced as Annexures 'B' and 'C' to this petition.2. Sri O. Sridharan, Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the land is question was granted to ...
Smt. K.C. Sathyavathi and ors. Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-03-1996
Reported in: ILR1998KAR445
ORDERP. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. Though this petition is posted for preliminary hearing in 'B' group, with the consent of the Learned Counsel for the petitioners and the Learned Government Pleader appearing for Respondents-1 and 2, it is taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this order.2. The petitioners in this petition are the legal heirs of one late Lakshmana Gowda.3. In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 9th February, 1988, passed by the 1st respondent, confirming the order dated 27th May, 1987, passed by the 2nd respondent in exercise of the powers conferred on him under Section 5(1) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), declaring the sale of land measuring 5 acres in Sy.No. 283, old No. 174, situated at Makodu village, Avathi Hobli, Chikmagalur Taluk, as null and void and further directing that the possession of the said land s...
Sadashivappa Vs. Shivayogappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Kant249
ORDER1. A subtle point of some consequence has agitated by the petitioner's learned Advocate in this case. Briefly summarised, he points out that the petitioner who is the eldest member of the joint family was given a share in the year 1992 and a document to that effect was executed and registered. He states that very shortly thereafter, the remaining members filed the present suit asking for partition and it appears that since the division was virtually between the family members that they decided to file compromise terms and dispose of the matter so that their shares would have been carved out at this stage. The petitioner who is the eldest brother filed an application to the effect that he is a member of the joint family by virtue of the fact that he is one of the brothers, thal he is consequently a necessary party to the proceeding and that therefore, he must be impleaded. The application under O. 1, R. 10. C. P.C. went a little further in so far as the petitioner contended that th...
Smt. Shakuntala and ors. Vs. Loganathan and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC581; 1998ACJ108; ILR1997KAR601; 1997(2)KarLJ287
M.P. Chinnappa, J.1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award dated 29.10.96 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and District Judge, Dharwad, in MVC. No. 312/83 dismissing the claim petition, the appellants have preferred this appeal.2. The brief facts leading to this appeal are:- the deceased Dhanikumar was working as the driver of the vehicle bearing No. TNC 4795 owned by one Loganathan - respondent No. 1. On 29.1.1983 the said Dhanikumar had taken the lorry from Davangare to Ranebennur and after unloading certain goods it was re-loaded with cattle feed in the said truck. He left Ranebennur at about 7-15 pm and he was driving his vehicle towards Davanagere, when he reached Makanur cross, the vehicle dashed against a stationary truck bearing No. MHF 1336 owned by the 3rd respondent, M.H. Rajpal and insured with the 5th respondent herein. As a result of this impact, the driver Dhanikumar succumbed to the injuries. Therefore, the legal representatives of the deceased Dhanikum...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›