Karnataka Court June 1999 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.
B. Mallappa Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-17-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR193; 1999(6)KarLJ517
ORDER1. The learned Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal and Annexure-K under which the Appellate Tribunal has chosen to cancel the grant in favour of the petitioner to the extent of 1 acre 38 guntas in Survey No. 96 under order dated 3-6-1987. It is seen from the order of the Appellate Tribunal that the petitioner and the 3rd respondent who are brothers, were granted 4 acres 38 guntas on 25-6-1983. On 3-6-1987, an additional 1 acre 38 guntas were granted by the Deputy Commissioner on the ground that the land of the petitioner is nearer to the land granted and such land is necessary for enjoyment of the petitioner's land. It is seen in both the cases that the lands granted are claimed to be Gomal lands and in both the cases, the extremes are ordered to be reduced to the extent of the grants. It is the case of the petitioner that the 4th respondent who had absolut...
Mahboob Khan Vs. Andhra Bank, Chamarajapet Branch, Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ151
ORDER1. The petitioner availed a loan of Rs. 1.50 lakhs from the respondent-Bank by depositing the original documents of his property with a view to improve his business run under the name and style of Ashoka Steel Products. It is stated that the entire loan amount together with interest had been cleared of on 28-2-1989 and inspite of that the original documents have not been returned by the Bank. Annexure-A is the letter dated 28-2-1998 wrote by the Manager of the Bank to the Karnataka State Financial Corporation to the effect that they have no objection for sanctioning credit facilities to the firm of the petitioner and that they have no lien on the assets of the firm. Petitioner has produced Annexure-B, the letter dated 2-3-1998 written to the Bank requesting to return the documents. Inspite of that since the Bank had not returned the documents, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the Bank to return the original documents.2. Learned Counsel ...
N.D. Rangappa Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Davangere and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ719
ORDER1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 10-3-1998 (Annexure-B to the writ petition) whereby the Deputy Commissioner has affirmed the order of the Assistant Commissioner, Davangere Sub-Division, Davangere. The petitioner has sought quashing of order dated 10-3-1998 passed by the Deputy Commissioner as well as order dated 26-7-1997 passed by the Assistant Commissioner.2. The facts of the case in brief are that, land bearing Sy. No. 24 (new No. 75) measuring 1 acre 30 guntas situated at Sulthanipura, Maikonda Hobli, Davangere Taluk and District, was granted in favour of respondent 3 on 8-6-1954. There was a condition in the grant itself prohibiting the alienation of the granted land for ten years' period. The respondent 3, according to the petitioner, sold the land to the present petitioner under registered sale-deed dated 24-3-1970 and the petitioner claimed to be in possession and enjoyment of the said land since the date of sale or alienation thereof in his favou...
K.V. Sathyanarayana Raju Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR912(KAR); [1999]240ITR912(Karn)
V.K Singhal, J. 1. The validity of Sections 2(ea)(i) and 2(ea)(ii) and 2(m) of the Wealth tax Act as inserted by the Finance Act, 1992, with effect from April 1, 1993, has been assailed in this petition. It is stated that prior to its amendment Section 2(m) which defined 'net wealth' included all the assets belonging to the assessee on such valuation date, minus debts owed by him. Now by an amendment it is only debts in respect of that assets which could be reduced and therefore it has gone beyond the scheme of the Act. 2. It is submitted that the levy of tax on land and building which is exclusively within the legislative competence of the State Legislature under entry 49, List II, Schedule VII, of the Constitution of India cannot be made liable to tax under the Wealth-tax Act. Reliance is placed on the judgment given by the apex court in the case of Sudhir Chandra Nawn v. WTO : [1968]69ITR897(SC) , where it was observed that the tax which is imposed by entry 86, List, I, of the Seven...
Mittal Steel Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR707(KAR); [1999]240ITR707(Karn)
V.K. Singhal, J. 1. The validity of Section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been assailed in this writ petition. Section 201 of the Income-tax Act, reads as under : '20(1) If any such person and in the cases referred to in Section 194, the principal officer and the company of which he is the principal officer does not deduct or after deducting fails to pay the tax as required by or under this Act, he or it shall, without prejudice to any other consequences which he or it may incur, be deemed to be an assessee in default in respect of the tax : Provided that no penalty shall be charged under Section 221 from such person, principal officer or company unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person or principal officer or company, as the case may be, has without good and sufficient reasons failed to deduct and pay the tax. (1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of Sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that subsection does...
Nagaraju Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR2903; 1999(4)KarLJ668
Y. Bhaskar Rao, C.J.1. These writ petitions are filed in the nature of public interest litigation assailing the action of the officers of the Excise Department empowered to grant licences, in granting innumerable licences under the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 ('Act', for short) and rules framed therein. Brief facts of the case are:2. The petitioners are the residents of different places in the State and they are aggrieved by the action of the respondents indiscriminately granting licences for the sale of Indian made liquor in the districts of Tumkur, Raichur and Kolar. The case of the petitioners is that the Act and the rules framed therein prescribe guidelines for the grant of licences. The authority to grant licence takes into consideration the population of the area as provided under the Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968. Therefore, the circular issued by the Commissioner dated 20-12-1995 (Annexure-H) be quashed with a direction to respondents 2 to 4 t...
The Tungabhadra Board, Tungabhadra Dam, Hospet, Bellary District Vs. E ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1999
Reported in: ILR2000KAR402; 1999(4)KarLJ716; (1999)IILLJ1014Kant
ORDER1. Appellant-Management (for short, 'the management') has filed this appeal against the order of the Single Judge dismissing the writ petition thereby maintaining the award of the Industrial Tribunal reinstating the respondent-workman in service but without backwages.2. Respondent-workman worked with the management for the period from 1-2-1982 to 1-10-1985 as Mazdoor. He was drawing wages as per the wage slip vouchers. His services were terminated without holding any enquiry and payment of retrenchment compensation. He raised an industrial dispute challenging his removal from service being illegal and without jurisdiction. Government of India referred the following dispute under Section 10(l)(d) of the I.D. Act to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication:'Whether the action of the Management of Tungabhadra Board, T.B. Dam, Bellary District in retrenching Shri Hussain Khan Chennappa, Jaffar and Venkatesh casual labourers is justified? If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled...
Smt. Puttamma and Another Vs. D.V. Krishnappa and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ103; 1999(5)KarLJ22
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. H.G. Ramesh for respondent-Insurance Company. 2. The parents of one Andanaiah aged about 14 years have approached this Court for enhancement of compensation granted by the Tribunal because of the death of the said boy. Andanaiah had died because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of lorry bearing registration No. CAM 195. The lorry ran over the deceased student on 19-11-1996 when he was proceeding towards his school on his bicycle. The lorry was insured with the second respondent-Oriental Insurance Company Limited. The Tribunal under the impugned judgment and award has granted compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards the loss of companionship, pain and mental agony suffered by the appellants being the parents of the deceased and Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses. 3. The Counsel for the appellants states that keeping in view the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Haji Zainullah Khan (dead) by L.Rs v Nagar Mah...
State by C.O.D. (Acd) Police Vs. M. Narayanaswamy Alias Narayana and A ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1999
Reported in: I(2000)DMC41; 1999(5)KarLJ94
M.F. Saldanha, J. 1. This is one more of the distressing cases where a young married woman has been driven to suicide virtually in the first year of marriage and the allegation is that it was because of harassment for dowry. The learned State Public Prosecutor has seriously assailed the order of acquittal and he submitted that the evidence of the parents and the other supportive material is sufficient to establish that demands were made for securing additional dowry and that the deceased was harassed and ill-treated to the extent of driving her to suicide.2. Normally, we would have upheld the submission except for the fact that there are blemishes in the prosecution case itself insofar as the mother has given a version that materially differs from that of her husband. More importantly, there is a specific case made out that dowry and gold ornaments were given. The learned Trial Judge has pointed out that the status of the parents was so very poor that it is quite impossiblethat they co...
S. Jayappa Vs. State by Circle Inspector of Police, Sullia Police Stat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-15-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALT(Cri)21; 1999CriLJ4475; ILR1999KAR3056; 1999(6)KarLJ200
ORDER1. Though these matters are posted for admission, as notices were issued to the State and the State is represented by the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor, they are taken up for final disposal. Since common question of law and facts arise for consideration and the petitioner is common in all the cases, these petitions are disposed of by a common order.2. The petitioner is arraigned as accused 3 in C.C. Nos. 1071 to 1077 of 1997 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sullia. He is charge-sheeted by the jurisdictional police along with other for commission of the offences under Sections 468, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After the Court took cognizance of the same, the petitioner moved the Court by an application to discharge him on the ground that prior sanction as required under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code was not obtained by the jurisdictional police, as admittedly the petitioner is a public servant and the offenc...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »