Karnataka Court September 1997 Judgments

Calicut Trading Co. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Intel ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1999KAR2320; [1998]110STC195(Kar)

G.C. Bharuka, J.1. These revision petition have been filed under section 23(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the Act', for short) against the order dated October 31, 1996 passed by the Tribunal refusing to interfere with the order of the first appellate authority, dismissing the appeal on the ground of limitation.2. The appeals before the first appellate authority-Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes were filed against the orders of an escaped assessment for the year 1989-90 made under section 12A of the Act as also imposing penalty under section 12-A(1-A) thereof and under section 12A read with section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act. These orders were passed on February 24, 1995 and the same had been served on the assessee on March 1, 1995. Though the limitation for preferring the appeal as provided under section 20 of the Act was 30 days but the same were filed on August 25, 1995. Thus, there was a delay of more than 140 days. For condonation of delay, the petitioner h...

State of Karnataka and Another Vs. Venkatesha Education Soceity (Regis ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ381

1. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, directing the appellants to refund an amount of Rs. 5,28,710/- to the respondents herein, this appeal has been filed on the grounds that the directions were unwarranted, contrary to law and the result of wrong conclusions of facts presumed by the learned Single Judge. It is submitted that without ascertaining the alleged actual loss suffered by the appellants, the learned Single Judge issued directions for the payment of aforesaid amount with the result that the appellants were subjected to the payment of the said amount twice, i.e., to the Institutions where the students who left the Institution of the respondents joined and secondly to the respondents herein despite the fact that they had not rendered anyeducation to the aforesaid students. It is further contended that there existed no rule providing that if the students decide to opt for another course or to other Institute they were liable to pay the fresh fee or that the fee e...

Sri Rajiv Gandhi College of Dental Sciences, Bangalore and Another Vs. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ446

ORDER1. Relying upon the Government Order dated 20-8-1996, Annexure-G, and Government Order dated 21-11-1996, Annexure-G1, the appellants herein filed a writ petition praying for issuance of direction to the respondent-University for granting affiliation under the provisions of the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge vide the order impugned in this appeal with the following observations and directions: '(a) The first part of the prayer (seeking a direction to first respondent-University to issue necessary orders in term of the recommendations of the State Government) is disposed of recording the submission of Sri A.V. Srinivasa Reddy, learned Counsel for the first respondent-University, that if and when application is made by the petitioner for affiliation for 1996-97, it will be considered expeditiously and in terms of the Government order recommending affiliation (su...

Management of the Mysore Coffee Processing Co-op. Society Ltd., Mysore ...

Court: Karnataka

R.P. Sethi, C.J. 1. The point of law required to be settled in these appeals is : 'Whether in a case where order of dismissal of a workman is proved to have been passed without holding any inquiry and consequently is justified by the management, before the Labour Court, the workman would be entitled to back wages from the date of dismissal till the date of the award or the order of dismissal would become effective from the date it is passed notwithstanding the non-holding of the domestic enquiry ?' 2. In support of the rival contentions the learned Counsel for the parties have relied upon the judgments of the Apex Court in : (1) P. H. Kalyani v. M/s. Air France, Calcutta : (1963)ILLJ679SC (2) The Oriental Textile Finishing Mills Amritsar v. The Labour Court, Jullundur & Ors. : (1971)IILLJ505SC (3) The Workmen of M/s. Firestone Tyre & Rubber Co. of India P. Ltd. v. The Management & Ors. : (1973)ILLJ278SC (4) D. C. Roy v. The P.O., Labour Court, M.P. & Ors. : [1976]3SCR801 . (5) Guja...

Krishna Subbarao Naik and Another Vs. Palani Swamy and Others

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1998ACJ841; AIR1998Kant214; [1998]92CompCas146(Kar); ILR1997KAR3122; 1997(4)KarLJ574

G.C. Bharuka, J.1. Heard Mr. D. O. Kotresh, learned counsel for the appellants, and Mr. S. V. Hegde Mulkhand, learned standing counsel for the respondent-New India Assurance Company Limited. 2. The fundamental facts are not in dispute. Pursuant to a motor vehicle accident, which had taken place on June 19, 1987, at 9.15 a.m., one Kum. Sridevi, aged about 21 years and still a student, suffered spot death. The owner of the vehicle being lorry No. MYL 5151 managed to obtain an insurance policy from the third respondent on that very day at 10.15 a.m., i.e., subsequent to the accident. In the said context, the only question which has fallen for our consideration is as to whether the insurance company can still be held to be liable for compensation of Rs. 33,000 as awarded by the Tribunal in the present case. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants has brought to our notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Ram Dayal : [1990]2SCR570 , wherein the ...

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Bangalore Vs. M.S.R. Marul ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1998(4)KarLJ55

ORDER1. I have heard the learned Advocates. One of the points canvassed on behalf of the respondents is that the petitioner ought to have approached the Tribunal and that it should not have come directly to this Court. Mr. Shetty on behalf of the petitioner drew my attention to an earlier decision of this Court in K.S.R.T.C. v Pauli Govis and Another, wherein my Brother Thakur, J., while going into the question of jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain the writ petition in situations where the alternate remedy is available has laid down that there is no absolute bar in approaching the High Court though, the party would be governed by the self-imposed restriction of the Courts namely that if an alternate remedy is available normally this Court should not entertain the writ petition. The principal reason for this is because the party cannot be permitted to bypass the straight remedy available under the law and in the process, the High Court cannot be overloaded with litigation which...

Syed Gafar Vs. the Divisional Commissioner, Bangalore Division, Bangal ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1998KAR375; 1998(4)KarLJ610

ORDER1. This petition is directed against the order dated May 20, 1997, passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Bangalore in No. CIN. Appeal 2 of 1997-98, and the petitioner has sought the quashing of that order. 2. The facts of the case as appears from the record are that earlier that is in 1991, in pursuance of proceedings in Arbitration No.l of 1971, finally registered Sale Deed dated 29-8-1991, was executed in favour ofRespondent No.3 by the other partners and the application for grant of permit was made by the petitioner and the respondent alleges to have made the application for permit, while the fact that is respondents having moved the application, is denied by the petitioner. This is not very material fact at this juncture. The main application for re-grant of license made by the petitioner has not been disposed of till today, instead the Licensing Authority granted a temporary permit that is temporary license in favour of the present petitioner vide, order dated 12-4-1997, Ann...

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sarojini

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2000ACJ126; ILR1998KAR2583

M.F. Saldanha, J.1. Two interesting points of law, both of far reaching consequences have been agitated in this pair of appeals which concern the same unfortunate incident. On 30.5.1992 a Premier Padmini Car met with an accident in which the son and the niece of the insured Narayana Shetty died. Two separate claims were preferred before the M.A.C.T., Befgaum and by order dated 6.7.1996 which is a common order in both the petitions a sum of Rs.2,80,000/- less Rs.25,000/- already received was awarded in respect of the death of the son and a sum of Rs.1,02,400/- less Rs.25,000/- already received was awarded in the case of the death of the girl Anitha along with interest and costs. By the present two appeals, the Insurance Co. has seriously contested the awards in respect of certain specified heads only. There is a common challenge in respect of both of them whereby the appellants contend that the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- which has been paid separately under a separate clause of the policy ...

Krishna Subbarao Naik and anr. Vs. Palani Swami and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: I(2000)ACC36

G.C. Bharuka, J.1. Heard Mr. D.O. Kotresh, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. S.V. Hegde Mulkhand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-New India Assurance Company Limited.2. The fundamental facts are not in dispute. Pursuant to a motor vehicle accident, which had taken place on 19.6.1987 at 9.15 a.m., one Kum. Sridevi, aged about 21 years and still a student, suffered spot death. The owner of the vehicle being Lorry No. MYL 5151 managed to obtain insurance policy from the 3rd respondent on that very day at 10.15 a.m. i.e., subsequent to the accident. In the said context, the only question which has fallen for our consideration is as to whether the Insurance Company can still be held to be liable for compensation of Rs. 33,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal in the present case.3. The learned Counsel for the appellants has brought to our notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of The New India Assurance Co. Limited v. Ram Dayal : [1990]2SCR570 wherein the Apex ...

The Managing Director, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Ban ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1998(4)KarLJ380

1. I have heard both the learned Advocates. This is one more of the horrifying accidents where the guilty parties are the KSRTC drivers and wherein, not one but two of the Corporation's buses are involved. The deceased was boarding the State Transport vehicle when another bus belonging to the Corporation approached at high speed and collided withthe bus in question, resulting in, the deceased being crushed under the vehicle and killed on the spot. The Tribunal after evaluating the various heads awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,13,250/-. After deduction, the extra amount has been paid with cost and interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum. This order has been assailed in the present appeal.2. The learned Advocate who represents the appellant has pointed out to me that there is an obvious error in awarding compensation under head No. 6, in as far as the Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 20. Having regard to the ages in question, he has demonstrated that the multiplier of 15 w...