Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1997KAR3238; 1998(1)KarLJ262
ORDER1. Heard the arguments of learned Counsel on both sides.2. The order dated 25-11-1993 of the Executing Court ordering issue of arrest warrant against petitioner judgment-debtor 4 is challenged by him in this revision.3. Indisputably, the decree under execution is the money decree. It was obtained against petitioner and three other judgment-debtors by the respondent herein. The notice of arrestcontemplated under sub-rule (1) of Rule 37 of Order 21 of Civil Procedure Code, was issued by the Court below and the same was returned duly served on the petitioner. When he remained absent in the execution proceeding on service of the said notice, the impugned order was passed against him.4. The proceedings recorded in the said order sheet of the Court below in Ex. Case No. 7 of 1991, do not disclose whether deposit of the subsistence allowance stipulated in sub-rule (1) of Rule 39 of Order 21 of Civil Procedure Code by the decree-holder for issuance of arrest warrant against petitioner. Or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1997(4)KarLJ663
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. The petitioner is the subscriber of Telephone No. 3300170, which is provided as a STD/ISD/PCO. She was served with two bills dated 15-8-1992 and 1-9-1992 (Annexure-B and C) for Rs. 13,455/- and Rs. 14,236/- respectively for the periods 25-7-1992 to 10-8-1992 and 10-8-1992 to 25-8-1992. According to her, the billing of calls made from her telephone (STD/PCO) was computerised and the computer print-out showed that the amount due for the calls made during those periods were only Rs. 6,421/- and Rs. 7,139/-. She, therefore, contended that the bills were excessive and filed Writ Petition No. 28127 of 1992 challenging the said bills. This Court directed reference of the dispute to arbitration under Section 7-B of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and accordingly the dispute relating to the said bills was referred to arbitration to the third respondent. The Arbitrator, after hearing the parties, has passed a reasoned award dated 27-4-1994, (Annexure-A) holding that the two bill...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1997KAR2922; [1998]229ITR71(KAR); [1998]229ITR71(Karn)
ORDERG.C. Bharuka, J. 1. The assessee is a Development Officer employed with the Life Insurance Corporation of India ('Corporation' for short). During the previous year pertaining to the asst. yr. 1983-84, he, apart from his other emoluments, had received a sum of Rs. 40,094 as incentive commission from the Corporation. At the time of assessment, he claimed 40 per cent. thereof, being Rs. 16,038, as permissible deduction. But the same was disallowed by the ITO on the ground that since incentive commission received by the assessee not being an income derived either from business or profession, no deduction, as claimed, is permissible therefrom. Accordingly, he added the incentive commission to his salary income and allowed only the standard deduction as contemplated under S. 16(i) of the IT Act, 1961 (In short, 'Act'). 2. Against the said assessment order, the assessee went in appeal before the AAC and succeeded in getting deduction of 40 per cent. as claimed. Aggrieved by the said orde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1998Kant135; ILR1997KAR3179
ORDER1. The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 20330 and 20852 of 1997 and the daughter of petitioner in W.P. No. 21137 of 1997 appeared for the Pre-University examinations conducted by the Department of Pre-University Education ('Department' for short) in April, 1997. They have also been issued marks card in regard to their performance in the said examination. The daughter of petitioner in W.P. No. 21137 of 1997 has passed the said examination. The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 20330 and 20852 of 1997 have failed in some subjects. They applied for revaluation of some papers.2. Wherever the revaluation marks was found to be within a range of plus or minus five, the department has not effected any change in the original marks; but where the change was more than plus or minus five, that is plus or minus six or more, the department has called upon the candidates to surrender the marks cards for correction/reissue of marks cards by incorporating the marks obtained on revaluation.3. In the case of candida...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999(4)KarLJ539
Acts/Rules/Orders:Constitution of India - Articles 40, 243-Q and 327;Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 - Sections 3, 4 and 9;Mysore Village Panchayat Act, 1926 - Section 58-B;Constitution (Seventy-fourth) Amendment Act, 1992;Delimitation Act, 1950 - Section 2Cases Referred:Amalpur Gram Panchayat v. State of Karnataka and Others, ILR 1997 Kar. 2078;Sundarjas Kanyalal Bhathija and Others v. Collector, Thane, Maharashtra and Others, AIR 1990 SC 261, (1989) 3 SCC 396;State of Uttar Pradesh and Others v. Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samiti and Others, AIR 1995 SC 1512JUDGEMENTR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Notification dated 21-1-1996 (Annexure-A) issued under Section 3 read with Section 9 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964, was challenged in the writ petitions filed in public interest which were dismissed vide the order impugned in these appeals. Vide the aforesaid notification smaller urban areas specified in Schedule-A to be called the City Municipal Council area of Krishnarajapuram and Mahadevapu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1998]94CompCas784(Kar)
1. In this petition, filed on behalf of some of the employees of Bharat Electronics Ltd., ('BEL' for short), the company incorporated under the Companies Act,' in the public sector, the petitioners question the procedure adopted by the Union of India in implementing the policy of disinvestment in public sector enterprises, in particular BEL.2. The Industrial Policy Statement of 1991 of the Government of India led to partial disinvestment in selected public sector undertakings. The relevant portion of the said policy statement dated July 24, 1991, is extracted below (see [1991] 71 ComC(St.) 126) :'31. After the initial exuberance of the public sector entering new areas of industrial and technical competence, a number of problems have begun to manifest themselves in many of the' public enterprises. Serious problems are observed in the insufficient growth in productivity, poor project management, over-manning, lack of continuous technological upgradation, and inadequate attention to R & D...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999ACJ528; 1998(4)KarLJ372
1. The appeal is directed against the joint order dated 4th July, 1991, wherein compensation of Rs. 5,400/- was awarded to the father in relation to the injuries suffered by him and compensation of Rs. 23,400/- was awarded to him as compensation to him for the death of his daughter. The facts of the case indicate that the appellant/father was riding a bicycle and that when he approached the main road near Banashankari, he instead of stopping and watching the traffic as required to be done, that he shot out on to the main road totally disregarding the traffic that was passing by him. To compound matters, the appellant had a second person on the bicycle who was his daughter and it was quite obvious from the description of the manner in which the accident took place, that the vehicle was totally unstable as a result of which a truck which was moving down the main road hit the bicycle. The appellant sustained minor injuries for which he was awarded compensation of Rs. 5,400/-. The Tribunal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1998KAR1277
ORDERChandrashekaraiah, J.1.Uppinangadi Grama Panchayath (hereinafter referred to as the Panchayat) is the owner of the Stall No. 3 (New No. 4) situated in the New Bus Stand Uppinangadi, Puttur Taluk.2. The Panchayath issued a notification proposing to auction the right to carry on the business in the above stall. Accordingly, the auction was held. In the said auction the bid of the petitioner was accepted as it was the highest bid. Thereafter the petitioner was permitted to carry on business in the said stall for the period between 1.4.1995 to 31.3.1996. Before the expiry of the said period, the grama panchayath issued a notification dated 2.3.1996 proposing to sell the right to carry on business for the period from 1.4.1996 to 31.3.1997 in the said stall. This notification has been challenged by the petitioner in this Writ Petition. 3. Sri Keshava Bhat learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that once the petitioner is put in possession of the stall as a licencee, he is entitled...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999(4)KarLJ550
R.P. Sethi, C.J. 1. Invoking the powers under clause (2) of Regulation 19 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960 (hereinafter called 'the Regulations'), the Managing Director of the Respondents/Corporation directed the appellant to retire from the services of the Corporation on the expiry of the period of three months from the date of receipt of the order dated 9-12-1986. The said order was challenged by the appellant in Writ Petition No. 1178 of 1987 mainly on the ground that, as the impugned order cast a stigma upon him, the same was liable to be quashed. Constitutional validity of Regulation 19 of the Regulations was also challenged. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, vide theorder impugned in this appeal, but protected the interests of the appellant insofar as the salary to be paid to him during the pendency of the writ petition on the basis of the Court order was concerned. It is submitted such order cannot be sustained unless it is...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The appellant Venkataramana Rao, one of the beneficiaries of an award dated 14-6-1986 has assailed the correctness of an order dated 8-3-1989 passed by the learned Civil Judge at Mangalore whereby the award in question has been set aside. Briefly stated, the dispute in question concerns the estate of one Sharadamma who died on 7-12-1985 and the question arose as to on whom the estate would devolve and secondly, to what extent. The matter was referred to the arbitration of two arbitrators Sri. P. Ramachandra Rao, a retired Civil Judge and Sri. B. Ananta Somayaji, a Senior Advocate of Mangalore. There were various contestants. The principal problem arose because of the fact that Sharadamma's father-in-law the late Venkataramaniah had as many as three wives, the first of whom did not have any children but the second two wives did have children resulting in two distinct branches of the family. The arbitration proceedings culminated in an award whereunder the arbitrators...
Tag this Judgment!