Karnataka Court January 1998 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.
Bellad Automobile Engineers Vs. K.A.T. and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Reported in: [1998]111STC121(Kar)
ORDER1. This revision is filed assailing the order of the Tribunal dismissing the appeal and confirming the assessment made by the assessing authority. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a dealer in automobiles carrying on business in selling two wheelers. The assessing authority during the final assessment for the period April 1, 1991 to March 31, 1992 held that the petitioner is liable to pay sales tax at the rate of 8 per cent on the two wheelers.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he is not liable to pay tax at the rate of 8 per cent and he is liable to pay only at the rate of 4 per cent as per the notification issued by the Government dated March 27, 1991. The assessing authority came to the conclusion that the notification dated March 27, 1991 applies only to the two wheelers which are sold from the canteen stores and not to the two wheelers sold in the open market. Assailing the said order the present petition is filed.3. The learned Government Advo...
H.M.T. Limited, Watch Factory IV Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corpor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Reported in: [1998(79)FLR511]; (1998)ILLJ841Kant
ORDERG. Patri Basavana Goud, J.1. At Annexure-E dated December 19, 1996, the 1st respondent- ESI Corporation has demanded a sum of Rs. 64,104/- by way of interest for nonpayment of contributions by the petitioner employer in time. At Annexure-G, the 3rd respondent-Recovery Officer has issued notice to the petitioner-employer for recovery of the above said amount. In these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner employer seeks quashing of the said two annexures.2. In exercise of the power conferred by Section 2(9)(iii)(b) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, ('Act' for short), the State Government issued a Notification dated March 27, 1992 enhancing wage limit coverage of the employees under the Act from Rs. 1,600/- to Rs. 3,000/-. This Notification was challenged by the 2nd respondent-Union of the Employees of the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 15030/92. By an order dated April 30, 1992 at Annexure-A, the learned single Judge before whom the said w...
Bellad Automobile Engineers Vs. K.A.T
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR1460
ORDER1. This revision is filed assailing the order of the Tribunal dismissing the appeal and confirming the assessment made by the assessing authority. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a dealer in automobiles carrying on business in selling two wheelers. The Assessing Authority during the final assessment for the period 1.4.1991 to 31.3.1992 held that the petitioner is liable to pay sales tax at the rate of 8% on the two wheelers. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that he is not liable to pay tax at the rate of 8% and he is liable to pay only at the rate of 4% as per the notification issued by the Government dated 27.3.1991. The Assessing Authority came to the conclusion that the notification dated 27.3.1991 applies only to the two wheelers which are sold from the canteen stores and not to the two wheelers sold in the open market. Assailing the said order the present petition is filed. 3. The Learned Government Advocate contended that the notification issue...
Karnataka Electricity Board, Sagar Vs. K. Shantharama Nayak
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-20-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)KarLJ546
Acts/Rules/Orders:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section - Order 39, Rule 1;Electricity Act, 1910 - Section 24;Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 - Section 51Case Referred:Punjab State Electricity Board and Another v. Ashwani Kumar, (1997) 5 SCC 120, JT 1997 (5) SC 182, 1997 (3) Supreme 615JUDGEMENT 1. The appellant is the Karnataka Electricity Board challenging decree in this appeal granted for supplying electric power to the plaintiff. This Court has been taking the construed view that the suit against the Karnataka Electricity Board is not maintainable. Following the dictum in Punjab State Electricity Board and Another v Ashwani Kumar :'Ordinarily, the Civil Court has jurisdiction to go into and try the disputed questions of civil nature, where the fundamental fairness of procedure has been violated. The statutory circulars adumbrated above do indicate that a fundamental fairness of the procedure has been prescribed in the rules and is being allowed. By necessary implications, the cogniza...
Dr. V. Lakshmidevi and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-20-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR1035; 1998(3)KarLJ140
ORDER1. This petition is by the legal representatives of one Sri S.G. Jayaram. The Corporation had passed a resolution to lease the property measuring 30 feet X 60 feet at the junction of Infantry Road and Cunningham road, Bangalore for a period of 35 years in favour of Sri S.G. Jayaram. Thereafter, after obtaining the approval from the State Government, the Corporation leased the said property in favour of the petitioner under the lease deed dated 10-11-1975 and put the said Sri S.G. Jayaram in possession of the property. After some years, the Corporation treating the possession of Sri S.G. Jayaram as unauthorised initiated the proceedings for eviction under the provisions of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1974. The Competent Authority ultimately had passed an order of eviction directing Sri S.G. Jayaram to vacate and handover possession of the property. This order was challenged by Sri S.G. Jayaram by way of an appeal in Miscellaneous Appeal N...
Nanjundachari Vs. the Chairman, Karnataka Electricity Board, Bangalore ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)KarLJ548
Acts/Rules/Orders:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order X, Rule 2 - Order 14, Rule 1;Electricity Act, 1910 - Section 12(2);Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 - Sections 10 and 11Cases Referred:Mysore State Electricity Board v. Shri Krishnapura Mutt, RSA No. 657 of 1965, DD: 31-5-1985;Aziz Ahmed Khan v. I.A. Patel, AIR 1974 AP 1;Laxmibai v. Kashibai, 1982(1) Kar. L.J. 229;Bindu Sharma v. Ram Prakash Sharma, AIR 1996 All. 429;Gangapal v. Lal Bahadur, 1895 ILR XVII All. 117;Jagannath Prasad Bhargava v. Lala nathimal and Others, AIR 1943 All. 17;Suraj Bhan v. Padam Chanda, 1979 ALJ 52;Moran Mar Basselios Callilies v. Rev. Mar Poulose Athaniaus, AIR 1954 SC 526;Smt. Kaniz Fatima v. Shah Naim Asharaf, AIR 1983 All. 450JUDGEMENT 1. This suit and the trial of the suit appears to be suffering from material irregularities and illegality.2. The brief facts of the case are that, this plaintiff's appeal arises from the judgment and decree of the Trial Court namely XVIII Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore,...
Manipur Vasant Kini Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR954; 1998(3)KarLJ121
ORDER1. The point which falls for determination is as to whether the decision rendered in the previous litigation filed as public interest litigation would operate as res judicata and a binding precedent to the subsequent litigation, also filed in public interest challenging the same administrative action which had been challenged in the earlier writ petition.2. Petitioner who is a practising Advocate has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the grant of deemed University status under Section 3 of the University Grant Commission Act, to Manipal Academy of Higher Education-respondent 4 (hereinafter referred as respondent 4) by respondents 1 and 2. He has also challenged certain actions of respondent 7-the Managing Trustee of respondent 4, which according to him involves very serious points of illegality and fraud played by respondent 7 throwing all the norms and principles of law to wind and formation of deemed University status under ...
Smt. Jayalakshmi and Others Vs. Smt. Gayathri and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Kant169; I(1998)DMC681
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23-11-1996 rejecting the prayer of the appellants for the grant of succession certificate on account of the death of Ramesh.2. The first appellant is the wife of late Ramesh and the II and III appellants are the children of first appellant and late Ramesh out of their wedlock.3. The first appellant's marriage took place with late Ramesh on 29-6-1980. Ramesh died on 8-1-1994. He was working as Artisan in K.S.R.T.C. He met with an accident on 7-1-1994 as he was hit by BTS bus bearing No. MEF 097 when he was crossing the road. He sustained severe injuries and died on 8-1-1994 at Nimhans Bangalore. Since the dependants were entitled to the benefits which were described in the schedule of the petition, the appellants being the L.Rs of the deceased applied for the grant of succession certificate. This application was numbered in P and SC. No. 50 of 1994. This application was contested by respondent 1 who also claims to be the wife of la...
Abdul Gafarsab Vs. State by Badami Police
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALT(Cri)52; 1998CriLJ2488
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. An interesting facet of the law with regard to the doctrine of grave and sudden provocation was seriously debated in the course of the hearing of this appeal by the appellant's learned Counsel Mr. Jadhav. Essentially, he had sought to contend that if there was a background of serious injustice or aggravating circumstances which had driven the accused to a point of desperation that these factors would have to be cumulatively assessed by the Court as circumstances which could result in grave and sudden provocation which impels the accused to an act of violence. We shall briefly recount the salient features of the prosecution evidence in the background of which this aspect of the law will have to be resolved.2. The deceased was a Range Forest Officer working with the Forest Department. At the relevant time, he was posted at Belgaum and had come to Badami where his family was residing, for the celebration of a feast. The accused had been earlier employed by the Departme...
Gowri and Others Vs. the Divisional Commissioner, Mysore Division, Mys ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: ILR1998KAR1928; 1998(3)KarLJ132
ORDER1. The petitioners seek quashing of the order dated 24-3-1992 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent-Divisional Commissioner under Section 118A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act'), whereunder the respondent-Divisional Commissioner has held that instead of the 1st petitioner herein, respondents 4 to 9 are entitled to receive compensation payable under Section 47 of the Act in respect of the properties owned by one Mr. Muguli Ramakrishna Bhat, since deceased.2. Admittedly, the said Ramakrishna Bhat was in possession of certain immoveable properties in Karopadi village of BantwalTaluk. He had no issues of his own. According to the petitioners, late Ramakrishna Bhat had taken the 2nd petitioner in adoption. The 3rd and 1st petitioners are his daughter-in-law and minor granddaughter respectively. Admittedly, the properties in respect of which compensation was payable were tenanted properties and on applications being filed by the tenants, occupancy was granted t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »