Karnataka Court September 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.
Ayodhya Restaurant Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Assess ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-23-1999
Reported in: [2001]121STC618(Kar)
ORDERV.K. Singhal, J.1. The order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dated August 22, 1996 has been challenged in this appeal for the assessment year 1992-93.2. The assesses has purchased husk from unregistered dealer which was used as a fuel in the preparation of the food articles and is liable to tax under Section 6 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The Tribunal found that the explanation to Section 6 under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act is not existing under the provisions of the Kerala and Tamil Nadu Acts, and therefore, the decisions given in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes), Ernakulam v. Hotel Liberty [1988] 69 STC 54 (Ker) and P.C. Balaramaraja v. State of Tamil Nadu [1994] 94 STC 212 (Mad) are not applicable.3. The following question of law is raised :'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the petitioner's case, purchase tax under Section 6 of the Act is leviable in respect of the husk purchased from unregistered dealers which i...
Shreyas Papers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-22-1999
Reported in: [2001]121STC94(Kar)
V.K. Singhal, J. 1. In all these matters, the controversy being common, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. In W.P. No. 32428 of 1993, validity of Section 15 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, has been assailed while in W.P. Nos. 1444243 of 1998, the action of the respondents in initiating the proceedings, for recovery from purchaser of plant, land and building has been challenged.3. The facts of the case are that, there was a concern in the name M/s. Mishal Paper Mills (P) Ltd., manufacturing duplex board, to which financial assistance was provided by the State Financial Corporation. In respect of default, when the payments were not made by the said company, powers under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, were invoked and assessments of the assets of the unit were taken. Thereafter, steps were taken by the Financial Corporation for auctioning the said unit. The petitioner purchased the land, plant and machinery in auction as the highest bidder. In respe...
Chitradurga GramIn Bank, Jogi Mutt Road, Chitradurga and Another Vs. P ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-1999
Reported in: ILR2000KAR553; 2000(2)KarLJ6; (2000)IILLJ456Kant
1. This appeal is filed by the Chitradurga Gramin Bank (hereinafter referred to as Bank, for short) aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 19-10-1998 passed in W.P. No. 10778 of 1996 allowing the writ petition filed by respondent-1, Manager of the appellant-Bank.2. The respondent, the Manager, was issued with a charge-sheet dated 29-5-1995 making certain allegations against him. The petitioner-respondent submitted an explanation dated 9-6-1995 to the Bank. Thereafter, the appellant-bank has filed a criminal complaint dated 4-6-1995 before Hiriyur Police, which has registered a regular case in Crime No. 268 of 1995, before the Court of Munsiff and JMFC, Hiriyur, the same is pending. The Bank during the pendency of criminal proceedings appointed appellant 2 as an Enquiry Officer and also appointed one Sri P.V. Kondappa as presenting officer to present the case on behalf of the Bank before the Enquiry Officer. The petitioner-respondent submitted a representation dated 29...
Raghunath and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-21-1999
Reported in: ILR2000KAR277; 2000(2)KarLJ237
ORDER1. These matters involving common questions are heard together finally by consent, and disposed of by this order. In this order, the term 'Act' will refer to the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966, the term 'Rules' will refer to the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Rules, 1968, the term 'Market Committee' will refer to an Agricultural Produce Market Committee established under the Act, and the term 'Bye-laws' will refer to the Bye-laws framed by the respective Market Committees under Section 148 of the Act.2. The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 31599 to 31628 of 1999 claim that they are licensed Weighmen under the Market Committee, Bidar. The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 31629 to 31663 of 1999 claim that they arelicensed Weighmen under the Market Committee, Gadag. The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 32573-32575 of 1999 claim that they are licensed Weighmen under the Market Committee, Mundaragi.3. The petitioners claim that the State Government formu...
Narayana and Others Vs. A. Sadashiva and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-18-1999
Reported in: ILR2000KAR487; 2000(5)KarLJ334
S.R. Venkatesha Murthy, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21-7-1998 in R.A. No. 41 of 1989 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Dakshina Kannada setting aside the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 266 of 1983 on the file of the II Additional Civil Judge, Dakshina Kannada. 2. The parties are referred according to their array in the Trial Court. 3. The plaintiff instituted O.S. No. 266 of 1983 for partition and separate possession of the plaint A Schedule properties and for 8 shares out of 27 equal shares in the property in question. A contention was raised that the tenancy on the basis of which occupancy rights were conferred in favour of the first respondent's father and one Muttu Hengsu was a joint family tenancy and so, plaintiff was entitled to a share in the lands in question. The Trial Court found in favour of the plaintiff and granted a decree as prayed for. The appeal by the defendant-Sadashiva S/o Shyamba Bhandari namely, the first respondent he...
H.J. Girish and anr. Vs. Smt. Sarojamma @ Jaitunbi and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-18-1999
Reported in: 2(2000)ACC122
M.P. Chinnappa, J.1. On 2.11.1988 at about 2.45 p.m. when deceased Nabisab was going by the Hero Majestic motor cycle bearing No. CNU 5537 near Nalavagal village cross, the tipper lorry bearing No. CNB 8151 driven by its driver rashly and negligently dashed against this moped as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries at the spot. Therefore, the wife and parents of the deceased lodged a claim in M.V.C. 1163/98 on the file of the Prl. Dist. Judge and MACT, Dharwad. The respondents resisted the claim on the ground that the deceased was responsible for the accident. But however after assessing the evidence, the Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that lorry was being driven in a rash and negligent manner when the accident occurred and further considering the age and also the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the claimants are entitled for a total compensation in a sum of Rs. 2,41,000/-. Being aggrieved by this judgment dated 12.2.1998 the ...
Gaffar Beig Vs. City Municipal Council, Krishnarajapuram and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-1999
Reported in: ILR2000KAR4686; 2001(3)KarLJ176
ORDER1. Petitioner herein applied to the 1st respondent to permit him to erect display board on the side of the public roads. He chose the following points in this behalf, namely,'1. K.R. Puram Railway Station2. Hoodi Circle3. In front of Tata Elexi4. Near Forest Office (Suri and Nayar) 5. Near Munne Kollalu Sethuve6. A.E.C.S. Extension (Kundalahalli) 7. Near Hope Farm8. Kadugodi Railway Station9. White Held Main Road10. Chellaghatta Main Road'. The application was submitted on 2-2-1999 and on receipt of the application it appears the 1st respondent addressed the letter to the 2nd respondent to secure their opinion. It is alleged that the Assistant Engineer of the 2nd respondent approved the erection of the hoarding. Thereafter Annexure-A permission was issued by the 1st respondent. Subsequently the petitioner erected the hoarding at various places indicated in Annexure-A order. The petitioner remitted the licence fee stipulated by the 1st respondent and invested, it is claimed, substa...
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Sayed Rahamulla and Ano ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-1999
Reported in: ILR1999KAR4541; 2000(5)KarLJ578
ORDERV.P. Mohan Kumar, J.1. This case was earlier heard by me and I dictated the order. Before I signed the same and on my going through the papers, I felt that the matter requires further hearing and as indicated in Vinod Kumar Singh v Banaras Hindu University and Others. I reported the same for furtherhearing to 10-8-1999. I heard the Counsel for the petitioner as also Mr. P.R. Ramesh and Sri V.S. Naik, the Counsel for the workers. After hearing, I reserved the matter for further orders. As the earlier judgment does not require material alteration except regarding the formulation of the relief to be granted, I am not recalling the said order.This case illustrates an unfortunate and sorry state of affairs prevailing in the conduct of case by the petitioner before the Tribunal as well as before other judicial forum. The petitioner acts, oblivious of the fact that it is the trustee of public fund and the brunt of the loss it sustains is passed on to the faceless and helpless common man ...
M. Abdul Rauf Vs. Vintage Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation) and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-1999
Reported in: [2000]102CompCas175b(Kar)
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This is an application filed by the company M/s. Vintage Hotels Private Ltd. praying for setting aside of the winding up order dated December 4, 1998. The application has been hotly contested and a large number of documents have been filed by the respective parties but I shall confine this order to the points that are strictly germane. The reason is because if there are disputes between the parties which are required to be examined by any other forum then anything said in this order should not be to the advantage of one or to the prejudice of the other.2. The admitted position is that the original winding up petition was filed by the company by the name of M/s. B. P. L. Telecom Ltd. A notice was published in the papers when the petition came to be admitted and as far as this public notice is concerned, the petitioner-company admits it came to its attention. They pointed out that after the notice was received that the company negotiated with the creditor and arrived ...
In Re: Karnataka State Financial Corporation
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-1999
Reported in: [2000]100CompCas452(Kar)
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This application has been filed on behalf of the Karnataka State Financial Corporation by learned counsel and learned counsel submits that the sole purpose of filing the application was in order to place before the court a submission on a correct point of procedure. Learned counsel submitted that the Karnataka State Financial Corporation is neither the petitioner nor respondent in the proceedings but that the Karnataka State Financial Corporation is virtually standing outside the proceedings and is represented by learned counsel for a limited purpose, i.e., since the Karnataka State Financial Corporation is the largest secured creditor it is proper and necessary that it be represented at all stages of these proceedings as various submissions need to be advanced even with regard to all issues concerning the properties involved in the winding up proceedings. In this background, learned counsel submitted that the direction to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000 towards initial ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »