Karnataka Court January 1998 Judgments
Jagadeesh Trading Company Vs. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Ta ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-1998
Reported in: [1998]111STC117(Kar)
Y. Bhaskar Rao, J.1. The assessee, who is the appellant filed this appeal assailing the order of the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.2. The facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered dealer under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') dealing in fireworks. The sale of the fireworks is only a seasonal business during the period of Deepavali. The appellant's premises was inspected on October 25, 1991 and it was found that the appellant has not maintained the accounts on October 24, 1991 and on October 25, 1991 and found shortage of stock to the tune of Rs. 61,178 for which the assessee has not issued sale bills. A notice was issued and the offence was compounded and a sum of Rs. 2,000 was levied as the compounding fee. Thereafter the assessee filed returns showing the turnover as Rs. 9,76,224.50. The assessing authority has found that the current accounts are not properly maintained and the accounts are not supported by required ...
Tag this Judgment!Jagadeesh Trading Company Vs. the Additional Commissioner
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-28-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR949
Y. Bhaskar Rao, J.1. The assessee, who is the appellant filed this appeal assailing the order of the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.2. The facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered dealer under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) dealing in fire works. The sale of the fire works is only a seasonal business during the period of Deepavali. The appellant's premises was inspected on 25.10.1991 and it was found that the appellant has not maintained the accounts on 24.10.1991 and on 25.10.1991 and found shortage of stock to the tune of Rs.61,178/- for which the assessee has not issued sale bills. A notice was issued and the offence was compounded and a sum of Rs. 2,000/ - was levied as the compounding fee. Thereafterwards, the assessee filed returns showing the turn over as Rs. 9,76,224.50. The Assessing Authority has found that the current accounts are not properly maintained and the accounts are supported by required bills. Howe...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Rahaman Shariff and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)KarLJ364
Y. Bhaskar Rao, J. 1. This batch of writ petitions are filed by the claimants under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, assailing the constitutional validity of Section 48 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 (shortly called 'the Act') to declare that Section 48 of the Act as void ab initio or as violative of fundamental rights of the petitioners under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and at all events repugnant and contrary to the declaration of law laid down by the Supreme Court in P.M. Ashwatha narayana Setty and Others v State of Karnataka and Others.2. The facts of the case are that all the petitioners in these petitions are claimants under the Land Acquisition Act. Their lands were acquired under the Act (Act No. 1 of 1894). The petitioners sought a reference to the Civil Court as the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is not adequate. The reference Court passed awards, after considering the material evidence on record and again a...
Tag this Judgment!S.S. Anand and Others Vs. the Management of Mahatma Gandhi Vidya Peeta ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)KarLJ293
ORDER1. The short question that falls for consideration in these writ petitions is whether the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the pay scales admissible to employees holding equivalent posts in the Government Educational Institutions. The question arises against the following backdrop.--The petitioners are working as non-teaching employees of the respondent-Society, who has among other Institutions established what is known as Dayanandasagar College of Engineering at Bangalore. The College, it is not in dispute, is recognised by the Government of Karnataka and the All India Council for Technical Education. It is affiliated to the Bangalore University under the Karnataka State Universities Act, 1976.2. The grievance of the petitioners is that they have been working as permanent non-teaching employees for more than 10 years in the aforementioned College against different posts such as Instructors, Programmers, Clerks, Mechanics, Helpers and Attenders in various Departments of ...
Tag this Judgment!P. Mohamad Dastagir Vs. Karnataka Board of Wakfs, Bangalore and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Kant297; 1998(3)KarLJ289
ORDER1. Jamia Masjid, Gandhi Bazaar, Shimoga, is a Wakf governed by the Wakf Act, 1995. Its Management appears to have been taken over by the respondent/Wakf Board, and an Administrator for looking after the affairs of the Masjid on behalf of the Board appointed. By an order dated 26th July, 1997, the then Administrator namely the Dist. Wakf Committee, Shimoga, was replaced by the petitioner. ever since the petitioner has been it appears working as the Administrator of the Masjid discharging managerial duties in respect thereof on behalf of the Wakf Board. By an order dated 21st of January, 1998, the Wakf Board has now relieved the petitioner of his duties and appointed one Sri H.M. Mujeeb Ahmed, Administrator, District Wakf Advisory Committee, Shimoga, as the Administrator of the Masjid. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a certiorari quashing the same.2. Mr. Tajuddin, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the removal ...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of Mysore, B.H. Road, Shimoga Vs. Provident Fund Commission ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)KarLJ566
ORDER1. The third respondent-M/s. Devi Sugars Limited (as at Annexure-A), pledged the sugar and has availed cash credit facility from the petitioner-State Bank of Mysore to the extent of Rs. 20 crores. The said third respondent has also fallen in arrears in the matter of payment of provident fund contributions under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 ('Act', for short). Respondents 1 and 2, namely, the Provident Fund Commissioner and the Recovery Officer, therefore proceeded to attach the sugar of the third respondent so pledged to the petitioner in the process of recovering the provident fund contributions. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution,the petitioner-Bank urges that it has got priority over the claim of respondents 1 and 2 under the Act. The Bank contends that the attachment of the godowns wherein the sugar bags are there, effected by respondents 1 and 2 in respect of the said provident fund arrears, is illegal. In this...
Tag this Judgment!Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Kadur, Chickmagalur District Vs ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-26-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)KarLJ195
ORDER1. Since the same 'questions of law' is involved in all these petitions, all of them were heard together and disposed of by the common order.2. The petitioner in all these cases are Agricultural Produce Marketing Committees of different areas in the State of Karnataka (hereinafter referred to as 'APMC' for brevity), has questioned the awards passed by jurisdictional Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal as the latter lacking jurisdiction to pass the impugned awards.3. Writ Petition No. 5046 of 1989 The Agricultural Produce Market Committee (for short 'the APMC'), Kadur, by its Secretary has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the order/award of the Labour Court, Mangalore, in reference No. ID (LCM) No. 89 of 1978, dated 5-1-1987.4. The first respondent to this petition was appointed on 18-3-1964 which was approved on 23-6-1969 by the petitioner. That on the ground that the first respondent was a regul...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. NitIn G. Khot and Others Vs. Station Commandant, Belgaum Cantonmen ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-23-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Kant300; ILR1998KAR2194; 1998(3)KarLJ102
R.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Freedom of movement is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India. The free movement assured by clause (1)(d) of Article 19 relates not to general rights of locomotion but refers to the right of shifting and movement from one part of the territory of the country to another without discrimination, restrictions or restrains. This right includes freedom of movement within a State as also between one State and another. The State, cannot put restrictions upon the movement of a citizen without reasonable grounds. As and whensuch restrictions are imposed, the same are required to be tested by the permissible limits prescribed under clause (6) of Article 19. It has to be kept in mind that the right conferred by the aforesaid clause is a right enjoyable by a free man. The rights conferred by Article 19 are popularly known as Civil Rights as distinguishable from legal, political and contractual rights.2. Such a golden right enshrined in Art...
Tag this Judgment!H.S. Nagaraju Vs. Regional Transport Officer, Tumkur Region, B.H.Road, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-22-1998
Reported in: 2000(1)KarLJ339
ORDER1. The petitioner is the registered owner of the Motor Vehicle bearing registration No. KA 06/M 1360 Bajaj Tempo Trax, having a seating capacity of 9+1. The petitioner intended to alter the vehicle from omni bus into a luxury taxi with an All India Permit and also to reduce the seating capacity to 5+1. Accordingly, the petitioner applied to the respondent for granting permission to effect the proposed alteration. But the respondent instead of permitting the petitioner accordingly, rejected the prayer to the effect that the vehicle in question is a Tempo Trax (Town and Country) 2650 WB vehicle and its capacity as 9 plus 1 and the tax is also being paid accordingly; the proposed alteration reduces the seating capacity to 5 plus 1.2. According to the learned Counsel Sri B.R. Shailendra, the order of the RTO, Tumkur, is liable to be set aside because by alteration of the seating capacity, nothing would be changed. On the other hand Mr. Kotian, learned Government Advocate, submitted th...
Tag this Judgment!State by Koratagere Police, Tumkur District Vs. T.K. Sadashivaiah BIn ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-22-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)KarLJ150
Acts/Rules/Orders:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 34, 323, 326 and 506;Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 3 and 378(1)JUDGEMENTM.F. Saldanha, J.1. The State of Karnataka has assailed the judgment and order dated 20th August, 1993 in C.C. No. 102 of 1991 on the file of the J.M.F.C., Koratagere. The incident was one of some seriousness where it is alleged that on 27-9-1990 the four accused arc alleged to have, in furtherance of their common intention, at Thita Grama, Sy. No. 65, assaulted Akkanagamma after having trespassed into her field and that they have committed offences punishable under Sections 323 and 326 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. There is also a subsidiary charge under Section 506, Indian Penal Code read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code in respect of threats that the accused are alleged to have held out at the time of the incident. The injured Akkanagamma lost four teeth as a result of this incident and sustained some other minor injury and the accused ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »