Karnataka Court November 1998 Judgments
Syndicate Bank, Mysore Road Branch, Bangalore Vs. A.P. Manjunath and A ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-26-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR1518; 1999(2)KarLJ362
ORDER1. The petitioner herein filed a suit SC 6622 of 1993 against the respondents for recovering a sum of Rs. 20,684.05 Ps. + interest and costs on the allegation that the 1st respondent on the suretyship of the 2nd respondent borrowed Rs. 15,000/- on 11-11-1987 from the petitioner-Bank agreeing to pay interest at 16.5% compounded quarterly onmonthly instalments of Rs. 4,000/-, on the security of pigmy deposit, fixed deposit, etc., Thereafter, the Court issued summons to the respondents/defendants. The suit summons were served on the 2nd respondent who filed written statement wherein among other things, she contended that the 1st defendant died on 6-5-1993 in Manipal Hospital. Therefore, it is contended that the suit is ab initio void as filed against a dead person. Thereafter, the application was filed for bringing the legal representatives of the deceased, 1st defendant along with the application to condone the delay, etc. Those applications came to be rejected by the Court below. T...
Tag this Judgment!Malleshi Alias Mallikarjuna Vs. State by Azadnagar Police Station, Dav ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-26-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD(Cri)890; 1999CriLJ2617; ILR1999KAR3835; 1999(5)KarLJ439
ORDER1. This revision is directed against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Chitradurga dated 25-8-1997 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 1994 affirming the conviction under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the IPC, passed by the learned Magistrate. While affirming the conviction under these sections, the learned Sessions Judge has set aside the conviction under Section 3(1) read with Section 113 of theMotor Vehicles Act. The learned Sessions Judge has sentenced three months RI under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the IPC and further imposed fine of Rs. 2,0007- under Section 304-A, in default to undergo one month RI.2. Mr. Ravi Hosmani for Basavaprabhu Patil strenuously submitted that, absolutely there is no evidence to convict the petitioner as there is no proper identification of the accused and the version of the eye-witnesses cannot be believed and further submitted that non-examination of the Motor Vehicle Inspector is fatal to the prosecution. On the other hand, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Webbs Sales and Services (Private) Limited, Bangalore Vs. M/S. Gurukru ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-25-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR707; 1999(1)KarLJ8
ORDERB.N. Mallikarjuna, J. 1. An unsuccessful defendant who did not succeed in taking possession of the immoveable property situated in prime area of Bangalore City (on Mahatma Gandhi Road) admeasuring 4050 sq. ft., has filed this complaint under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to secure the presence of the plaintiff and one another and to punish them for contempt of Court.2. Briefly stated, facts leading to the presentation of this complaint may be stated as under:A-3 Bharat Petroleum Corporation represented by its Senior Divisional Manager, instituted the suit O.S. No. 8301 of 1995 in the Court of the City Civil Judge, Bangalore on 9-12-1995 for declaration that under the provisions of the Burma Shell (Acquisitions of Undertakings in India) Act, 1976 is entitled to continue in possession and enjoyment of the above said property for a period of 25 years commencing from 1-10-1995 on payment of quarterly rent of Rs. 1,350/- to the defendant-complainant in this case, on th...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Khader Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-25-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALT(Cri)558; 1999CriLJ1801; ILR1999KAR1243; 1999(2)KarLJ311
ORDER1. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 20-11-1997 passed by the learned Prl. Sessions Judge, Raichur, in Special Case No. 10 of 1996, on LA. II this revision is filed.2. One person by name Sri Kristappa, son of Siddramappa of Aransanagi Village lodged a complaint on 24-12-1994, on the allegation that the accused by name Amjad Ali, working as a village accountant at Kadlur Village, demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 300/- from him for change of katha. According to the complainant he paid a sum of Rs. 300A and there was again demand by the accused for further amount of Rs. 300/-. But the complainant told the accused that as he had already paid Rs. 300/- he could do the needful. However, the case came to be registered in Crime No. 13 of 1994 by the Inspector, Lokayuktha, Raichur, for offence punishable under Sections 7 and 130(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The police recorded the statement of the complainant and other witnesses...
Tag this Judgment!The Principal, Sainik School, Bijapur Vs. K.K. Naik and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-25-1998
Reported in: 1999(3)KarLJ16
1. This appeal is filed by the unsuccessful respondent being aggrieved by the order dated 5-8-1996 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 18225 of 1989 allowing the writ petition and while quashing the impugned order dated 13-1-1989 issuing a direction to the present appellant to grant the benefit of Pensionary Benefit Scheme to the writ petitioner under the notification dated 1-4-1988.2. The brief facts are as follows: Respondent 1 herein (hereinafter referred to as the 'writ petitioner') was earlier working as Accountant in the Office of the Accountant General, Bangalore, and, after resigning the post, he joined the Appellant Sainik School, Bijapur, as an Accountant in the year 1964. On attaining superannuation he retired from service on 1-10-1986. It is to be noted here itself that during this period the writ petitioner was entitled for the benefit of Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) which he availed of after his retirement in the year 1986. Thereafter, by the noti...
Tag this Judgment!H.G. Mahesh Vs. Smt. Honnamma and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-25-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ753; ILR1999KAR1548; 1999(6)KarLJ382
1. This is the claimant's appeal being aggrieved of the dismissal of the claim in MVC No. 1369 of 1987 on the file of the Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The injured H.G. Mahesh, while he was proceeding on his Luna bearing Regn. No. CKD 566 at about 7.00 p.m. on 22-6-1987 towards his house and reached near N.T.T.F. Bus stop on Peenya Road that a Tempo bearing Regn. No. CAA 695 came driven at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed, as a result, he sustained with fracture injuries. Due to the injuries suffered in the road accident, he presented a claim petition before the Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-.3. Respondent 1, the owner of the Tempo filed objections stating that the vehicle has been insured with New India Assurance Company Limited, and the policy is valid as on the date of the accident and denied all other averments which are inconsistent with the objections statement and pra...
Tag this Judgment!Bidar Sahakari Sakkare Kharkhane Niyamat, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-25-1998
Reported in: [1999]237ITR445(KAR); [1999]237ITR445(Karn)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. The validity of Section 143(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been assailed in all these writ petitions, on the ground of liability of additional tax being violative of the principles of natural justice, discriminatory, arbitrary, unreasonable and as such are in violation of articles 14 and 265 of the Constitution of India. The provisions of Section 143(1A) are as under :'143. (lA)(a) Where, in the case of any person, the total income, as a result of the adjustments made under the proviso to Clause (a) of Sub-section (1), exceeds the total income declared in the return by any amount, the Assessing Officer shall,-- (i) further increase the amount of tax payable under Sub-section (1} by an additional income-tax calculated at the rate of 20 per cent. of the tax payable on such excess amount and specify the additional income-tax in the intimation to be sent under Sub-clause (i) of Clause (a) of subjection (i);(ii) where any refund is due under Sub-section (1), reduce ...
Tag this Judgment!Bidar Sahakari Sakkare Krarkhane Niyamat and ors Vs. Union of India an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-25-1998
Reported in: (1999)152CTR(Kar)314
ORDERV.K. SINGHAL, J:The validity s. 143(1A) of the IT Act, 1961, has been assailed in all these writ petitions, on the ground of liability of additional tax being violative of the principles of natural justice, discriminatory, arbITRary, unreasonable and as such are in violation of Arts. 14 and 265 of the Constitution of India. The provisions of s. 143(1A) are as under:'Sec. 143(1A)(a): Where, in the case of any person, the total income, as a result of the adjustments made under the proviso to cl. (a) of sub-s. (1), exceeds the total income declared in the return by any amount, the AO shall,-(i) further increase the amount of tax payable under sub-s. (1) by an additional income-tax calculated at the rate of 20 per cent of the tax payable on such excess amount and specify the additional income-tax in the intimation to be sent under subcl. (i) of cl. (a) of sub-s. (1);(ii) where any refund is due under sub-s. (1) reduce the amount of such refund by an amount equivalent to the additional...
Tag this Judgment!Nisar Ahmed Abdul Rahiman Killedar Vs. Babulal Achal Singh Raj Purohit ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-24-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ58; [1999(82)FLR808]; ILR1999KAR2803; 1999(2)KarLJ445; (1999)IILLJ1337Kant
1. Admit.Heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The only controversy raised in the present matter is if a driver is not capable of driving the vehicle, whether it should be considered 100% loss of earning capacity. Learned Counsel for the appellant has referred the judgment given in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Limited v Kashim and Another. In that case the Doctor has assessed the loss of earning capacity at 100% and the Commissioner has assessed the loss of earning capacity of 100% which was upheld by this Court. Learned Counsel for the respondent has pointed out that the permanent total disablement has been defined under Section 2(1) as under:'2(l) 'Total disablement' means such disablement, whether of a temporary or permanent nature, as incapacitates a workman for all work which he was capable of performing at the time of the accident resulting in such disablement: Provided that permanent total disablement shall be deemed to result from every injury ...
Tag this Judgment!Rojappa Alias Thabati Belchada Vs. Muthappa Belchada and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-24-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2108; 2000(3)KarLJ450
ORDER1. O.S. No. 42 of 1983 came to be filed by one Gangu Belchadthi for partition and separate possession of the suit property on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Udupi. The said suit came to be decreed and a preliminary decree was passed against the defendants. Being aggrieved by that preliminary decree, the first defendant therein preferred initially before this Court R.F.A. No. 443 of 1986, but subsequent to the amendment of Civil Courts Act, the appeal stood transferred to the II Additional District Judge, D.K., Mangalore and the same was registered in R.A. No. 165 of 1989. When the appeal was pending the first respondent/plaintiff died on 26-7-1993. The first respondent Counsel filed a memo reporting the death of the plaintiff/first respondent on 28-6-1995. Thereafter the first defendant/appellant filed I.A. under Order 1, Rule 10 of the CPC to bring the legal representatives of deceased plaintiff as respondents in her place. That application was opposed by ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »