Karnataka Court November 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.
The Vysya Bank Limited, Bangalore Vs. the Special Land Acquisition Off ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-18-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR754; 1999(2)KarLJ476
ORDER1. In all these civil revision petitions, the Vysya Bank Limited, Bagalkot Branch (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bank') are the petitioners. The bank had given certain loans to the claimants, who are respondents in the civil revision petitions. The claimants had mortgaged certain lands and buildings in Mugalalli Village, Bagalkot Taluk to the bank. Subsequently the lands belonging to the claimants that were mortgaged in favour of the bank were acquired by the State Government for the purpose of Upper Krishna Project.2. In the notification issued by the State Government under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') the encumbrance in favour of the bank was shown. In all these cases, the Land Acquisition Officer (hereinafter referred to as the 'L.A.O.') passed awards. The L.A.O. made an apportionment with regard to the principal amount owing to the bank and disbursed the amounts that was receivedas compensation due by them to the bank. In ot...
N. Vinodkumar and Co. and Onam Agarbathy Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-18-1998
Reported in: [1999]237ITR502(KAR); [1999]237ITR502(Karn)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. The validity of the provisions of Sections 271B, 44AB, 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, have been assailed in these petitions. The petitioners are aggrieved by fixing different dates in obtaining the audit report for the companies vis-a-vis non-companies. It is submitted that the persons whose accounts are to be audited constitute one group and liability under Section 44AB have been cast where sales, turnover or bills, receipts exceeds rupees 40 lakhs in the previous year. It is submitted that all the assessees which fall in that category constitute one category and there cannot be a further discrimination regarding different dates in furnishing the return.2. The Explanation to Section 44AB defines the specific dates in relation to the accounts of the previous year or years relating to the assessment year means the date of expiry of four months from the end of the previous year or, where there is more than one previous year, from the end of the previous year which...
N. Vinod Kumar and Co. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-18-1998
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(Kar)608
ORDERV.K. SWHAL, J:Validity of the provisions of ss. 271B, 44AB and s. 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961 have been assailed in these petitions. The petitioners are aggrieved by fixing different dates in obtaining the audit report for the companies vis-a-vis non companies. It is submitted that the persons whose accounts are to be audited constitute one group and liability under s. 44AB have been casted where sales, turnover or bills, receipts exceeds rupees 40 lakhs in the previous year. It is submitted that all the assessees which fall in that category constitute one category and there cannot be a further discrimination regarding different date in furnishing the return.2. Expln. to s. 44AB defines the specific dates in relation to accounts of the previous year or years relating to the assessment year means the date of expiry of 4 months from the end of the previous year or, where there is more than one previous year, from the end of the previous year which expired last before the commencement...
Smt. Indira Rao (Deceased) by L.Rs and Others Vs. West Coast Paper Mil ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-17-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)KarLJ406
ORDER1. The petitioners, in this petition, are the landlords and the respondent is the tenant. This petition is filed under sub-section (1) of Section 50 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), challenging the correctness of the order dated 29th of March, 1996 made in H.R.C. No. 1016 of 1992 by the Court of Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, rejecting the eviction petition filed by the petitioners-landlords seeking eviction of the respondent-tenant under Section 21(j)(h) and (p) of the Act.2. The parties to this petition, in the course of this order, will be referred to as 'the landlords' and 'the tenant'.3. During the pendency of this petition, the first petitioner-Smt. Indira Rao expired on 3rd of April, 1997 and, therefore, a memo was filed stating that she has died leaving behind some of the petitioners as her legal heirs.4. The facts in brief, which may be relevant for the disposal of this petition, may be stated as hereunde...
Krishnarao Alias Kamalakar Rao Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-17-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR314; 1999(1)KarLJ676
ORDER1. By proceedings dated 14-8-1981 of the Administrator of the second respondent-Corporation, an extent of 215.39 sq. yards of vacant land was granted in favour of the petitioner and the matter was submitted to the Government for sanction. The State Government by order dated 16-9-1983 accorded sanction to grant the site measuring 215.39 sq. yards in CTS Nos. 102, 104 and 105, MTS, Hubli, in favour of the petitioner. In pursuance of the aforesaid order and proceedings, the Commissioner of the second respondent-Corporation conveyed right, title and interest in favour of the petitioner in respect of the vacant site measuring 1958 sq. feet situated adjacent to CTS No. 103 of Ward-V under a registered sale deed dated 24-4-1984. The name of the petitioner was also mutated in the registers of the Corporation.2. It appears that the committee of Bairnath Devasthanam, Arvindnagar, encroached upon a portion of the site granted to the petitioner and put up a construction thereon. The petitione...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Dr. Jayanthi and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-17-1998
Reported in: 2001ACJ69
Hari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment and award dated 9.10.1997 delivered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chintamani (Civil Judge and J.M.F.C, Chintamani). The facts of the case in the nutshell are that the claimant-respondent, who filed the Claim Petition No. 369 of 1985 was a lady Medical Officer, who was proceeding on 21.2.94 at 7.30 a.m. towards the bus-stop near Raghavendra Mutt, Bangalore Road, Chintamani, to go to Kaiwara. According to the claimant's case respondent No. 1 came driving his scooter rashly and negligently and when he was in his effort to overtake the tractor coming towards Chintamani on Bangalore-Chintamani Road, dashed against the claimant-respondent and caused her grievous injury resulting in permanent disablement. The number of the scooter has been mentioned as KA-07 E-5432. According to the claimant due to accident she sustained permanent disablement and injuries, namely, (1) genu valgum, (2) joint stiffness, (3) lateral osteoarth...
Smt. MohisIn Arabegum Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-16-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2328
ORDER1. The petitioner is one of the 124 lecturers, who had been favoured with temporary appointments against unsanctioned posts for fixed periods and emoluments therefor, by the Vice-Chancellor of the respondent-Mysore University in flagrant violation of the statutory provisions contained in the Karnataka State Universities Act, 1976 (in short, the 'Act') from time to time during the last several years. The petitioner has now approached this Court under writ jurisdiction for issuance of writ of mandamus to the respondent-University for regularisation of her services meaning thereby for commanding the authorities under the Act to create a post and absorb her against the same by waiving the mandatory provisions contained under Sections 28, 35, 36, and 49 of the Act.Facts2. The present petitioner has filed orders issued by the Registrar of the respondent-University (Annexure-A series) by which she had been given temporary appointments from time to time in the University's Evening College...
Kavita Pabby and Others Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-16-1998
Reported in: 2000(3)KarLJ182
ORDER1. The petitioners herein are students of first year M.B.B.S. course. They are pursuing their studies in Dr. Ambedkar Medical College, Bangalore, which is affiliated to respondent Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences. These petitioners had sat at the first year M.B.B.S. examination which was conducted by the respondent-University in May 1998. The examination was held in three papers namely Anatomy, Physiology and Biochemistry. Each of these petitioners have failed in one of the three papers. They failed to secure the minimum of 50% in theory papers. The shortfall in marks is of 7, 6, 6 and 6 respectively. Under the said circumstances they have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:'(i) to declare that the petitioners are entitled for the gracing marks adopted in the case of a student with Register No. 96 MO 774 of Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences for a pass in the respective subject of May 1998 Examination of Phase I M.B.B.S.; (ii) to call for records a...
C.G. Krishna Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-16-1998
Reported in: (2000)162CTR(Kar)354; [1999]238ITR276(KAR); [1999]238ITR276(Karn)
Y. Bhaskar Rao, J.1. This writ appeal is filed assailing the order of the learned single judge (see, : [1999]237ITR422(KAR) ), dismissing the writ petition.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The undisputed facts are that the appellant filed his return on November 10, 1989, for the assessment year 1987-88 declaring his total income as Rs. 13,220. This was followed by a revised return filed on March 16, 1990, disclosing an income of Rs. 1,26,220. The return was further revised by the appellant on April 22, 1990, disclosing an income of Rs. 2,69,880. An amount of Rs. 1,09,190 was payable as tax on the income disclosed in the second revised return, but he paid along with the second revised return a sum of Rs. 1,02,180 only leaving behind a balance of Rs. 7,010 unpaid. The assessing authority completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act and demanded the balance amount of Rs. 7,010 on March 29, 1990. The...
Atria Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-16-1998
Reported in: ILR1999KAR328; [1999]236ITR56(KAR); [1999]236ITR56(Karn)
V.P. Mohan Kumar, J.1. The dispute in this writ petition centers on the scope of Section 281 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act', 1961). The petitioner alleges that it has secured a tender for the execution of a work of 99.72 million US dollars magnitude and the same is to be financed by foreign and domestic debt and in that behalf, the petitioner approached two financial institutions, namely, Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI), and the State Bank of India. It is further alleged by the petitioner that when approached, as there was certain income-tax raid in the premises of a concern of which some of the directors of the petitioner concern and they were common, these institutions required the petitioner to submit a no-objection certificate (NOC for short), issued by the Income-tax Department permitting the petitioner to hypothecate/ pledge the properties. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted annexure-A application on August 20, 1998, under Section 281 of the Act, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »