Karnataka Court April 1999 Judgments
M.D. Rajendra Vs. Syman Fransis
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-26-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ693
ORDER1. Heard on maintainability of appeal against the order of the Court below sought to be impugned.2. It is not in dispute that the impugned order falls within the purview of Rule 8 of Order 38 read with sub-rule (4) of Rule 58, Order 21 of the CPC. By the order in question the Trial Court has raised the attachment before judgment of the vehicle that was effected during pendency of the suit proceeding and has thereby allowed the application of the respondent-claimant. Rule 8 of Order 38 of the CPC states that:'Where any claim is preferred to property attached before judgment, such claim shall be adjudicated upon in the manner hereinbefore provided for the adjudication of claims to property attached in execution of a decree for the payment of money'.2-A. The provision providing for adjudication of the claims to property attached in execution of a money decree is sub-rule (4) of Rule 58 of Order 21, which reads as under.-'Where any claim or objection has been adjudicated upon under th...
Tag this Judgment!C.R. Guru Rao and Others Vs. Corporation of the City of Bangalore and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2826; 1999(3)KarLJ54
ORDER1. The petitioner-employees of the Corporation are aggrieved of an order dated 10th of February, 1993, whereby the State Government havedeclined to approve the sale of residential quarters presently in their occupation. The challenge is based on a two fold submission, one relating to what is alleged to be a discriminatory treatment meted out to the petitioners and the other suggesting non-application of the mind by the Government while declining to approve the proposal submitted by the Corporation. Before I deal with the submissions on their merit, it is necessary to state a few facts relevant to the controversy.2. By a communication dated 26th of September, 1981, the Government asked the respondent-Corporation to send a suitable resolution for the sale of 20 quarters owned by the Corporation situate at the Magadi Road in favour of the employees of the Corporation in occupation of the same. A resolution was passed by the Corporation, but only 11 years later in 1992, which was forw...
Tag this Judgment!N. Narasimhiah Vs. the Commissioner, Corporation of the City of Bangal ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2946; 1999(3)KarLJ59
ORDER1. The petitioner has in this writ petition questioned the correctness of an order issued by the respondent purporting to correct what is described as a mistake resulting in denial of promotion and consequent loss of seniority to the 2nd respondent. The rectification of the error and restoration of seniority is under challenge primarily on the ground that with passage of time, the 2nd respondent had lost the right to make any grievance and the Corporation the power to redress the same. Delay in the correction of the mistake was according to the petitioner sufficient for the respondents to accept the settled position and to continue the status quo. The controversy arises in the following circumstances.2. The 2nd respondent joined the Corporation of City of Bangalore as a Statistical Assistant in the year 1961. He was appointed as a Second Division Clerk on 9th of April, 1964 as against the petitioner who was appointed to that post only on 25th of October, 1965. Both the petitioner ...
Tag this Judgment!Uday Krishna Naik Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2648; 1999(3)KarLJ99
ORDER1. Appointments on compassionate grounds in the Civil Services of the State of Karnataka are governed by what are known as Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 framed under Section 8 of Karnataka State Civil Services Act, 1978. The rules permit such appointments in favour of the dependents of a deceased Government servant subject to the fulfillment of the conditions stipulated for the purpose. One of the conditions prescribed is that the family of the deceased Government servant is facing financial crisis or destitution. Rule 5 of the rules requires that every dependent of a deceased Government servant seeking appointment on compassionate grounds shall make an application to the Head of the Department in which the deceased was serving within one year from the date of the death of the Government servant in such form as may be notified. In the case of minor dependents, the proviso to the rule permits an application within one year after he/she ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka Vs. K.S. Manjunathachari and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD(Cri)841; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)382; 1999CriLJ3949; II(1999)DMC335; 1999(3)KarLJ593
Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. This case is poignant with tragedy. It is a sad saga of a young girl who met her cruel fate within hardly six months of her marriage.2. A-1 was married to a young lady by name Bharathi. A-2 and A-3 are the parents of A-1. All the accused were charge-sheeted for the offences under Sections 302, 201, 203, 498A, 304B read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act read with Section 34 of the IPC. The Trial Court acquitted A-2 and A-3 the parents of A-1 of all the charges. While acquitting A-1 of the serious charges under Sections 302 and 304-B of the IPC the Trial Court convicted A-1 for an offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC and sentenced A-1 for a period of three years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for three months.3. The State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 868 of 1995 against the acquittal of the accused. The accused 1 has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 1995 agai...
Tag this Judgment!P. Govinda Bhat Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD(Cri)869; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)309; 1999CriLJ4488; ILR1999KAR2669; 1999(4)KarLJ386
ORDER1. In this petition, the accused has challenged the order of the II Additional Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangalore, passed in Cr. R.P. No. 62 of 1998 and the order of the JMFC, Sulia passed in C.C. No. 1070 of 1997 and prays this Court to quash the entire proceedings pending on the file of the JMFC, Sulia in the said criminal case.2. The petitioner is an Assistant Agricultural Officer, Soil and Health Centre, Shimoga. He was working as Assistant Agricultural Officer at Sulla. Upon the complaint filed by the Assistant Director of Agriculture, Sulia, police registered a criminal case against the petitioner and others for an offence punishable under Section 409 of the IPC. It was alleged that the petitioner and others misappropriated Government funds to the tune of Rs. 1,96,913/- between the period 1991 to 1994. The I.O. after completing the investigation filed a charge-sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 420, 409 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The I.O. has laid eight...
Tag this Judgment!K. Ramanjaneyalu Vs. Assistant Executive Engineer (Electrical), Karnat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ40
ORDER1. Sri N.K. Gupta, is directed to take notice for respondents 1 and 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to delete third respondent. Permitted. Third respondent is deleted. This matter is heard finally with consent and disposed of by this order.2. Petitioner was served with a back-billing claim dated 1-2-1999 (Annexure-C), demanding a sum of Rs. 10,31,411/- on the ground that the inspection of the installation bearing RR No. IP 31610/P3.4 of the petitioner at Awambhavi, Bellary, by vigilance staff of KEB disclosed that the same was being used for commercial purpose with effect from 5-11-1993. Petitioner has filed objections on 4-2-1999 (Annexure-D),followed by further objections dated 23-2-1999. The first respondent thereafter sent a communication dated 2-3-1999 (Annexure-E), wherein he refers to the petitioner's letters dated 4-2-1999 and 23-2-1999. However, instead of considering the said objections, he proceeded on the basis that the petitioner has failed to pay th...
Tag this Judgment!Thimmaiah Vs. Sreenivasa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2937; 1999(5)KarLJ37
ORDER1. Heard.2. This revision by defendant 2 in O.S. No. 50 of 1992 is directed against the Trial Court's order rejecting his I.A. No. 3 which was made praying to first try preliminary issues 5 and 6 in the suit relating to pecuniary jurisdiction of the Trial Court and Court fee paid on theplaint.3. The said suit was instituted by the respondent-plaintiff for partition and separate possession of his share in the suit properties and for mesne profits. The petitioner, who is defendant, has filed his written statement contesting plaintiffs claim contending, inter alia, that the suit property has been overvalued by the plaintiff as also that the Court fee paid on the plaint was not correct and proper. On these objections two of the issues framed by the Court below viz., issues 6 and 7 are:6. Whether the defendants prove that this Court has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit?7. Whether the defendants prove that the suit is not properly valued and the Court fee paid on the plaint is ...
Tag this Judgment!B. Gangadhar Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: ILR2000KAR622
ORDER1. The order of the State Government dated 23-8-1997 is the bone of contention of the petitioner, who was working as Administrative Officer, till he voluntarily resigned from the services of the University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'University').2. Brief facts are:Petitioner had joined the services of the University on 23-7-1971 as Assistant Superintendent (Administration). He was promoted to the cadre of Assistant Administrative Officer by the University by its official memorandum dated 27-1-1986. Petitioner was one of the aspirants to the post of Administrative Officer in the University. The selection committee had recommended his name also along with one another candidate by name Sri Kotresh. The appointing authority appointed Sri Kotresh as Administrative Officer of the University and further decided to keep the name of the petitioner in the panel of Administrative Officer in reserve to be appointed after the retirement of Sri Kotresh as A...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prana Carriers (P) Ltd. and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Kar)435
ORDERBy the court:These applications are filed by the Revenue seeking reference of the question of law arising out of the orders of the Tribunal pertaining to various assessment years. As the question of law arising is common one in all these cases they are disposed of by a common judgment.2. In all these cases the respondents are the assesses companies. The assessing officer for the relevant assessment years while computing the total income chargeable to tax had to determine the adjusted book profit for purposes of s. 115J(1) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called the 'Act'). The assessing officer while doing so had not taken into consideration the amount of the unabsorbed depreciation while determining the loss.3. There was an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) at the instance of assessee. Appellate authority held as per cl. (iv) in Explanation to s. 115J, the net loss had to be determined after taking into consideration and including the amount of unabsorbed depreciation.4. Agg...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »