Karnataka Court May 1999 Judgments
Amit Boards, Baikampadi, Mangalore and Others Vs. Union of India and A ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-31-1999
Reported in: 1999(66)ECC515; 1999(114)ELT387(Kar); 2000(2)KarLJ227
ORDER1. The limited controversy in these petitions is whether the writ petition was admitted and pending before this Court in terms of Section 95 of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 so as to entitle the petitioner to file the declaration and claim the benefit under the said scheme. The scheme came into force on 1-9-1998 and was in force till 31-12-1998 and thereafter extended by another one month. The petitioner filed the writ petition in this Court on 16-12-1998. On 31-12-1998, rule was issued in view of the urgency of the matter. The last date under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme was at that time 31-12-1998. It was specifically mentioned in the order that the rule is issued to facilitate the petitioner to file the declaration under the Karvivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998. Maintainability of the said writ petitions were kept open. A clarification was issued by the Central Government in exercise of the power under Section 96 of the scheme that proof of admittance, or where in any Court there ...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmappa Kallappa Balaganur and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and O ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-31-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Kant61; ILR1999KAR2655; 1999(4)KarLJ603
ORDER1. The questions that would arise for consideration in all these petitions, are the same and identical. Hence, all these petitions are heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. The substantial question that would arise for consideration in these petitions is with regard to the constitutional validity of sub-section (2) of Section 159 and sub-section (3) of Section 179 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, insofar as they do not permit the non-elected members of Zilla Panchayat to participate and vote in the meeting convened for the purpose of considering the 'no confidence motion' moved against the Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of the Panchayat.3. Petitioners 1 and 2 in Writ Petition No. 7131 of 1999 are the Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Bagalkot Zilla Panchayat, Bagalkot (hereinafter referred to as 'the Panchayat'). They were so elected as Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of the Panchayat in the election held on 22nd of April, 1998. The term of office of Adhyaksha and Upadhy...
Tag this Judgment!State by K.M. Doddi Police, Mandya District Vs. Siddegowda and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-31-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR3373; 1999(4)KarLJ662
Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. This is an appeal against acquittal preferred by the State. The State being aggrieved by the judgment and the order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court in S.C. 3 of 1998 in acquitting the respondents-accused of the offences under Sections 143, 148, 302 read with Section 149 or 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 324 read with Section 149 or 324 read with Sections 34 and 326 read with Section 149 or 326 read with Section 34 of the IPC has preferred this appeal against acquittal.2. The case of the prosecution is that all the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly at about 9.30 p.m. on 21-8-1987 and armed with deadly weapons assaulted Chikkavenkata and committed his murder. The accused caused injuries to P.Ws. 1 to 3, 6, 7 and 8 in the scuffle, The prosecution case further is that the accused attempted to put up a shed in the land in Survey No. 111/1 of Yaladahalli Village (hereinafter referred to as the disputed land) and when th...
Tag this Judgment!Abdulrahup Mohamad Isaq Chattarki Vs. Smt. Ahmadi Begum
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-31-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALT(Cri)330; 1999CriLJ3934; 1999(5)KarLJ53
ORDER1. This revision under Section 19 of the Family Court Act arises from the judgment and order dated 16-2-1996. The Court below awarded a maintenance of Rs. 450/-. per month to the present respondent who is a lady who had been married to the present revision petitioner on 3-5-1992.2. The case of the present respondent was that she married the present revision petitioner on 3-5-1992 and after marriage she had been to his place and led married life for a period of one year and thereafter her husband began to pick up quarrels with her asking her to bring Rs. 10,000/- cash and two tholas of gold by way of dowry and on her refusal to do so, dragged her out of the house. She has also stated in the petition that at that time she was carrying by five months. In spite of the best efforts made by the elders to take her back, her husband did not take her back and she states that her husband is a cruel man and she cannot lead a peaceful life with him and there is much danger to her life if she ...
Tag this Judgment!Srikanta Datta Narasimha Raja Wadiyar Vs. Assistant Commissioner of We ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-31-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR3146; [1999]240ITR87(KAR); [1999]240ITR87(Karn)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. This is a second round of litigation, challenging the recovery proceedings under the Wealth-tax Act. Earlier in W. As. Nos 626-635 of 1992 by judgment dated April 2, 1992, recovery proceedings were quashed on the ground that a valid recovery certificate has not been issued. Thereafter the Tax Recovery Officer has issued the certificate under Section 222 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Section 32 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The facts of the case are that the petitioner in his capacity as karta of the Hindu undivided family filed the application for settlement before the Settlement Commission in respect of the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78. The applications were filed as karta of the minor Hindu undivided family, as well as in his individual capacity. The Settlement Commission on September 29, 1998, passed the order determining the petitioner's wealth for the various assessment years, however, the Commission did not quantify the wealth-tax liability. Con...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka Vs. Siddegowda and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-31-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3819
1. This is an appeal against acquittal preferred by the State. The State being aggrieved by the judgment and the order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court in S.C. 3/1988 in acquitting the respondents-accused of the offences under Section 143,148,302 read with 149 or 302 read with 34 IPC and Section 324 read with 149 or 324 read with 34 and 326 read with 149 or 326 read with 34 IPC has preferred this appeal against acquittal.2. The case of the prosecution is that all the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly at about 9.30 p.m. on 21-8-1987 and armed with deadly weapons assaulted Chikkavenkata and committed his murder. The accused caused injuries to P.Ws.1 to 3, 6, 7 and 8 in the scuffle. The prosecution case further is that the accused attempted to put up a shed in the land in Survey No. 111/1 of Yaladahalli village hereinafter referred to as the 'disputed land') and when the deceased party came and objected to the accused putting up the shed it is alleged that ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Gowramma Vs. M.P. Moulamma and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-28-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)KarLJ268
Acts/Rules/Orders:Constitution of India - Article 243-ZA;Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 - Sections 13, 14, 21 and 352;Karnataka Municipalities (Election of Councillors) Rules, 1977 - Rules 3-A, 4 and 8(3);Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1992Cases Referred:State of Karnataka and Others v. G. Nagappa and Othes, AIR 1975 SC 1708JUDGEMENT1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 352 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (in short, the 'Act') against the order dated 4-3-1998 passed by the Election Tribunal declaring the election of the present appellant as Councillor from Ward No. 3 of the Town Panchayat Committee, Tekkalakota, Bellary Sub-Division, as void.2. The undisputed facts may be noticed at the threshold. The State Government, pursuant to the powers conferred under Section 13 of the Act, by Gazette Notification No. HUD 313 MLR 95, dated 25-11-1996 (Ex. D. 2), divided the Town Panchayat at Tekkalakota into 19 wards. Annexure-1 to the notification contains the territori...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Jayashankar Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ95
ORDER1. The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus restraining the 3rd respondent-Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') from filling up the post of Development Officer, treating the said post as a backlog vacancy and for a further direction to fill up the said post in accordance with the provisions of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board Cadre and Recruitment Regulations (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations') and for other reliefs.2. The petitioner joined the services in the Board on 10-2-1982 as Assistant Engineer. Thereafter, the petitioner, Sri M. Ramakrishnappa and the 4th respondent were selected and promoted as Deputy Development Officers in the pay scale of Rs. 2,200-4,070 by an order dated 19th October, 1989. In the select list the petitioner is at serial No. 1, whereas the 4th respondent is at Sl. No. 3. Consequent on the promotion, the petitioner and respondent 4 reported for duty on 20-10...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of India, Super Market Branch, Gulbarga Vs. Ravindra
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ108
ORDER1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16-11-1995 delivered by the Principal Civil Judge, Gulbarga (Mr. V.N. Madhava Reddy) in U.R. (S.C. No. 25 of 1995) in State Bank of India v Ravindra, dismissing/rejecting the plaintiff's suit for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 18,080-60 against the defendant-respondent.2. The facts of the case in nutshell are:That according to the plaintiffs case the defendant-respondent, who was an unemployed youth, borrowed a sum of Rs. 15,000/- from the Bank on 24-2-1992 in order to do fertilizers business. As per the plaintiffs case the defendant-respondent agreed to repay the aforesaid amount which had been taken as loan with interest at the rate of 8% below S.B.I. advance rate, minimum 12% rising and falling therewith and it was agreed that defendant was to repay the said amount at 12% interest in 50 instalments at the rate of Rs. 300/- p.m. According to the plaintiff's case the payment of instalment was to commence fr...
Tag this Judgment!D. Krishna Rao and Others Vs. the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalo ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-28-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2992; 1999(5)KarLJ279
ORDER1. The petitioners in these writ petitions have sought for a direction to the respondent-Special Deputy Commissioner to accept the conversion fine as per the rules and issue necessary conversion certificate in favour of the Karnataka Government Class 'D' Employees' House Building Cooperative Society Limited. The facts in these writ petitions are as follows.-The Karnataka Government Class 'D' Employees' House Building Co-operative Society Limited is a society registered under the provisions of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1957. The petitioners in W.P. No. 30444 of 1994 are the owners of the land measuring 122 acresin Survey Nos. 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19 and 20 to 27 of Lingadeer-anahalli, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The petitioners in W.P. No. 30445 of 1994 are the owners of the land measuring 26 acres, 3 guntas in Survey Numbers 12 (western portion) 35, 36, 37 and 38 of the above said village. The petitioner in W.P. No. 30446 of 1994 is a society i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »