Karnataka Court July 1999 Judgments

Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore Vs. Minaxi and Others

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2000ACJ385; AIR2000Kant73; ILR1999KAR3219; 1999(5)KarLJ573

Acts/Rules/Orders:Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 2(1), 140 and 147(1);Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923;Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Section 95(1)Cases Referred:New India Assurance Company Limited, Bangalore v. Nagarathna, 1996(6) Kar. L.J. 77, ILR 1996 Kar. 3041;Kashmir D. Gudinho (deceased) by L.R. and Another v. Suresh Kulkarni and Others, 1997(5) Kar. L.J. 364, ILR 1997 Kar. 1491;National Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore v. Smt. Rasheeda and Another, 1997(7) Kar. L.J. 629, ILR 1997 Kar. 2697;Pushpabai Parshottam Udeshi v. M/s. Ranjit Ginning and Pressingh Company Private Limited, AIR 1977 SC 1735, 1977 ACJ 343;National Insurance Company v. Dundamma, 1991(3) Kar. L.J. 505, ILR 1991 Kar. 2045;A.A. Haja Muniuddian v. India Railways, AIR 1993 SC 361, (1992) 4 SCC 736;Skandia Insurance Company Limited v. Kokilaben Chandravadan, AIR 1987 SC 1187, (1987) 2 SCC 654;United India Insurance Company v. Kashimsab, 1993(2) Kar. L.J. 559, ILR 1993 Kar. 1991;Shanthabai and Others v. Shekappa...

Sanjaykumar Varma Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1999(6)KarLJ467

ORDER1. The petitioner is an Engineering student pursuing a degree course in P.D.A. College at Gulbarga affiliated to the 2nd respondent Gulbarga University. Results for the 5th Semester Examination conducted in March 1999 showed that the petitioner had failed in Ceramic Engineering Thermo Dynamics. He applied for the grant of grace marks admissible as per the ordinance issued by the University, which request was turned down having regard to a circular dated 7-5-1999 issued by the University according to which award of grace marks was impermissible in view of the directions issued by this Court in W.P. No, 31741 of 1998, disposed of on 24-11-1998. Aggrieved, the petitioner has in the present writ petition assailed the correctness of the circular in question and prayed for a mandamus directing the University to award the permissible grace marks.2. Sri Naik, Counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the impugned circular had been issued by the University on a total misunderstandin...

State of Karnataka Vs. Ramappa Aparai Ghasti

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2000CriLJ599

M.F. Saldanha, J. 1. The State of Karnataka has assailed the acquittal of the respondent who was the accused in Sessions Case No. 125/94 in the Court of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Belgaum. The charge against the accused was that on 23-12-1993 at about 19.30 hours that he had assaulted the deceased Shantabai with an axe and inflicted fatal injuries on her as a result of which she died. The background to the case as alleged by the prosecution was that Shantabai's husband had died about twelve years earlier and that the accused had been carrying on an illicit affair with her for several years. This was objected to by the sons and later on by Shantabai herself, who insisted that the accused should stop coming to their house. It is alleged that despite this he kept coming there and that about one month earlier he had been finally told not to come to that place any more. According to the son - P.W. 1 - Anil, he is working in a brick kiln and that his mother used to bring his food to ...

Krishnasa Kheerasa Habib Vs. Shah Parasmal Pittaji Jain

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2000Kant129; 2000(1)KarLJ12

ORDER1. The tenant has preferred this revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure alleging that both the Courts below have erred in determining the jurisdictional issue pertaining to the alleged relationship of landlord and tenant between the contesting parties.2. It is not in dispute that the petition premises measuring 10' x 10' abutting station road is part and parcel of C.T.S. No. 2674, Hubli Municipality, which in all measures 75' x 10'. It was owned by Moorusaviramath. The Swamiji of the Math had given on lease the petitionpremises along with the other abutting properties to a partnership firm M/s. Shah Parasmal Pittaji Jain and Sons, (in short, the 'firm') in the year 1969 for a period of 9 (nine) years. The petition premises was subleased to the present petitioner by the firm much before the expiry of the period of lease in favour of the firm. The respondent took the entire CTS along with the petition premises on lease for a period of 51 years under the r...

Manjappa Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Sagar Sub-division, Sagar and Oth ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2000KAR178; 1999(5)KarLJ545

ORDER1. Heard Mr. Gopal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri B. Veerappa, learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 4.2. The subject-matter of the writ petition is 3 acres of land in Sy. No. 36, Block No. II of Bilasugodu Village, Sagar Taluk. The said land was granted to one Kannappa for full market price under the then Mysore Land Revenue Rules as amended by the Mysore Land Revenue (Amendment) Rules, 1960, by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Sagar, vide Order No. Dis. R3. DAR. 76/62-63, dated 4-12-1962. The said saguvali chit was issued to Kannappa on 5-5-1964. The said grantee and his son sold the land in favour of the petitioner by a registered sale deed dated 20-4-1968 for a valuable consideration and ever since then the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the land. The name of the petitioner has been mutated as per Annexure-J on the basis of the sale deed. The name of the petitioner has been entered in the revenue records as could be seen from the...

India Cements Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Ass ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2000]118STC29(Kar)

V.K. Singhal, J. 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of forfeiture of Rs. 45,42,416 passed Under Section 18-AA of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. Petitioner is a manufacturer of cement and provides discount, based on turnover. In the monthly returns the turnover mentioned in the invoices undergoes small reduction on account of the discount being liable to be adjusted. Even in the annual return submitted by the petitioner, the net realization of the tax have been shown. The assessing authority came to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 45,42,416 which refers to the credit notes issued after raising the invoices is the amount of tax collected for which the notice was issued and the amount was forfeited. Provisions of Section 18-AA of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 provide that where any amount is collected by way of tax or purporting to bo by way of tax from any person by any dealer in contravention of Section 18, whether knowingly or not, such dealer shall pay the entir...

Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1999Kant483; ILR2000KAR63

ORDERG.C. Bharuka, J. 1. The petitioner is a medical college. It conducts the courses for under-graduate as well as post-graduate students in the faculty ofmedical science. In the present writ petition, the college desires quashing of letter dated 1 -9-1997 (Annexure 'K') issued by the respondent-Medical Council of India (in short, 'the MCI') by which the admission capacity of the college in respect of post-graduate courses for the academic year 1996-97 has been fixed. The petitioner-college has also questioned the consequential order dated 22-1-1997 (Annexure 'J') passed by the respondent-University by which the petitioner-college has been directed to discharge the students who have been admitted in excess of intake fixed by the MCI. There is a further prayer to regularise the admissions made in excess of the admission capacity so fixed by the MCI. The Genesis : 2. Indiscriminate admissions in professional Colleges without having any regard to the infrastructure requirements prescribe...

K.M. Ibrahim Alias Bava and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1999(2)ALD(Cri)773; 2000CriLJ197

M.F. Saldanha, J. 1. The first of these three appeals, has been preferred by the five accused persons in Sessions Case No. 9/95 which was tried by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kodagu. The Criminal-Appeal 718/96 has been preferred only by accused No. 2 and is a Jail Appeal , Crl. Appeal No. 835/96 has been preferred by accused Nos. 4 and 5 and is also a Jail Appeal. This Court appointed learned Advocate Mr. Jagadish Patil as amicus curiae in Crl. A. 835/96. Suffice it to say, that all the accused persons have been duly represented before us. The five accused originally stood charged with an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC and briefly stated, the allegation was that acting conjointly, these persons are alleged to have hired a jeep bearing No. KA12M 1474 on the night of 2/3-10-94 and that shortly thereafter they strangulated the driver of the jeep by the name of Yusoof and threw his body by the roadside at Nallihudikeri village and that they thereafter made away with the je...

United Breweries Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Court: Karnataka

ORDERV.K. Singhal, J. 1. The petitioner has been subjected to penalty under Section 13(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 in respect of the late payment of monthly tax. Under the scheme of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, monthly tax is to be paid in advance within 20 days after the close of the preceding month to which it relates on the basis of the turnover particulars shown in the statement. The amount so shown have been considered to be the amount due under Section 13(2) of the Act.2. Sub-section (2) of Section 12-B provides that if default is committed in the payment of tax in accordance with Sub-section (1) beyond ten days, after the expiry of the period specified in that Sub-Section, the dealer shall pay by way of penalty, a sum equal to penalties specified under Clause (ii) of Sub-section (2) of Section 13 during the period in which such default is continued. Section 13 provides for recovery of tax and penalty. It is provided that the tax or any other amount due under this Act...

R.K. Arora and Sons Private Limited, Calcutta Vs. Pampasar Distillery ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1999(5)KarLJ549

ORDER1. I have heard the learned Counsel representing the petitioner as also the respondents on merits. As the order sheet will indicate, there was a suggestion at one stage that the parties should resolve the matter but the Counsel informed me that this was not possible. That aspect has therefore been totally ignored by me and after hearing both the learned Counsel, the Court has decided the preliminary issues raised purely on merits.2. The petitioners contend that they had supplied a total of 1,81,650 empty bottles to the respondents as per the details set out in the petition. It is their case that the respondents have made payment for 84,770 bottles and that the payment for the remaining part of the consignment is outstanding. The usual averments have been made that despite demands etc, that the respondents have failed and neglected to make the payment and therefore after serving a statutory notice the present petition has been filed. The respondents have contested the petition. The...