Karnataka Court February 2000 Judgments
M.V. Venkatappa Vs. State by Channapatna East Police Station, Channapa ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: II(2000)ACC522; ILR2000KAR1701; 2000(3)KarLJ625
ORDER1. Government Pleader is directed to take notice for the respondent. He files objections.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the learned Magistrate has not released the vehicle, when he made an application under Section 457 of the Cr. P.C., which had met with an accident. The petitioner claims that the vehicle be released to him as it is a stage carriage which is required for operation of transporting passengers. The learned Magistrate despite being told that the vehicle was not required for purpose of investigation, proceeded to pass the order dated 17-2-2000 whereunder he sought information on various aspects and disposed of the application for return of the vehicle. Hence this petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C.3. The State has opposed the application on the ground that the vehicle in question was involved in an accident committing offences under Section 66 read with 192(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, that the petitioner has not produced the permit and other docume...
Tag this Judgment!S.K. Rama Reddy Vs. the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Kant330; ILR2000KAR2642; 2000(5)KarLJ271
ORDER1. The petitioner, a member of the 2nd respondent-Society, calls in question Annexure-H, by which, under sub-section (8) of Section 29F of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 ('Act' for short), the 1st respondent has authorised the 3rd respondent to convene a meeting of the members of the committee of the 2nd respondent to elect the office bearers under sub-section (4) of Section 29F of the Act.2. In May 1999, elections were held for the committee of the 2nd respondent-Society for the period from 1999-2000 to 2003-2004. In the said election, in order to elect nine Directors, 13 candidates had filed nominations. Out of them, nine withdrew their nominations. After scrutiny, only four persons remained in the field. They were, therefore, declared as having been duly elected. They were available to function. That is how subsequently, three of them resigned and their resignations were accepted. That means that, out of the four elected members of the committee, after three of ...
Tag this Judgment!H. Chandrashekar Vs. Shafiq Ali Khan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: 2000(6)KarLJ237
ORDER1. The defendant has preferred the above civil revision petition aggrieved by the order of dismissal of his application to appoint a Commissioner of Forensic Science Laboratory to test the voice recorded in the cassettes marked as Exs. D-24 and D-25 and to determine as to whether the said voice is that of P.W. 2-Smt. Naaz Parveen, in the interests of justice and equity.2. The case of the defendant is that, during the talk over the telephone the said voice is recorded and in the said conversation of P.W. 2-Smt. Naaz Parveen has promised him that she would handover the possession of the suit schedule property on two occasions. But when she was confronted in the cross-examination during the course of her evidence, she denied the voice contained in the two cassettes as that of hers. It is learnt that the Forensic Science Laboratory will undertake the job of voice testing and determine as to whose voice is contained in the two cassettes. The application is opposed by the plaintiff sayi...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Siddhartha Medical College Students' Parents Association, Tumkur V ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-28-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Kant457; ILR2001KAR278
ORDER1.This writ petition has been filed by the Students' Parents Association of Sri Siddartha Medical College, Tumkur, questioning the competence of Government of India to fix the fees structure for students admitted to medical and dental colleges as has been sought to be done under communication dated 26-3-1999 (Annexure-B) in purported exercise of powers under Clause 8(b) of the Medical Council of India (Norms and Guide-lines for Fees and Guidelines for Admissions in Medical Colleges) Regulations, 1994 and Clause 8(b) of the Dental Council of India (Norms and Guidelines for fees and Guidelines for Admission in Dental Colleges) Regulations, 1994 (in short the 'MCI and DCI Regulations').2. The sole legal issue raised before us concerns determination of respective legislative competence and interpretation of certain Central enactments and the Regulations framed thereunder in order to ascertain as to who is the final statutory authority under those enactments tospecify the tuition fees ...
Tag this Judgment!Basavarajappa Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-28-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR2666; 2000(4)KarLJ521
ORDER1. Mr. A. Padmanabha, learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3.2. The petitioner borrowed loan from 4th respondent-Malaprabha Grameena Bank and dug a bore-well in his land. The bore-well failed. Under the Irrigation Bore-wells Drilling Programme (IBDP) and Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) the amount taken for failed borewells would be waived. Since the borewell got drilled by the petitioner failed, he sought to avail the benefit under the aforesaid scheme. The concerned Geologist certified that the borewell is failed. The Tahsildar also certified accordingly. The request of the petitioner was rejected by the 2nd respondent with a direction to submit fresh application through 4th respondent-Bank. The petitioner complied with the same. Since there was no consideration, he filed W.P. No. 23856 of 1995 and in that this Court directed 2nd respondent to dispose of the application of the petitioner. Pursuant to such dir...
Tag this Judgment!A.T. Chengappa Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-28-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Kant287; ILR2000KAR2301
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J. 1. Despite calls there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard the learned Government Pleader. Perused the petition averments, counter statement and the documents.2. The petitioner was granted permission under Annexure-A dated 1-12-1993 to fell certain tress in the lands mentioned in the Schedule in the writ petition. The period for which the said permission granted was up to 15-1-1994. It is stated that petitioner had to pick the coffee crop before felling the trees and he had to wait for some time. He filed an application to the 2nd respondent to extend the time for felling the trees. By the impugned endorsement at Annexure-C dated 15-7-1995 the petitioner was informed that his request cannot be considered as the Government order dated 12-4-1991 is withdrawn. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to extend the time for felling the trees.3. Statement of objections is filed on...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kori Gowramma Vs. the Vysya Bank Limited, Kampli and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)KarLJ524
1. This first appeal by the 3rd defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 3-2-1997 passed in O.S. No. 66 of 1993 on the file of the Civil Judge, Hospet, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff/1st respondent for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,19,287/- with interest at the rate of 17.5% p.a. from the date of filing the suit till the date of realisation from defendants 1 and 2/respondents 2 and 3 jointly and severally.2. The rankings of the parties herein are referred to their respective rankings before the Trial Court.3. The suit was filed by the plaintiff-Vysya Bank Limited for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,19,287/-, which has been decreed by the Trial Court with interest at the rate of 17.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realisation from defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally. The Trial Court had also directed the defendants 1 and 2 to pay the said decretal amount within a period of 6 months from the date of order and in case of failure, plaintiff-...
Tag this Judgment!Keshav Vittal Naik Vs. M/S. Channakeshava Prasad Wines, Honnavar, Dist ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-24-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)KarLJ230
1. This appeal is filed assailing the order of the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition.2. The matter relates to dispute with regard to partnership in respect of M/s. Chennakeshava Prasad Wines, a partnership firm (hereinafter referred to as 'Firm'). The appellant herein filed an application on 18-6-1998 to the 3rd respondent-Deputy Commissioner (Excise) alleging that he and his wife Smt. Lakshmi are the partners of the firm; that one Prasanna D. Naik has registered another partnership deed on 4 digits stamp paper stating that he and his wife Smt. Saraswathi are the partners of the firm, thereby, fraud has been committed by furnishing false information and requested not to renew the license of the firm to conduct the liquor business. Based on that representation the 3rd respondent issued an endorsement on 5-9-1998 stopping renewal of the license. The same was challenged by Prasanna D. Naik in appeal before the Excise Commissioner. The Excise Commissioner allowed the appeal o...
Tag this Judgment!K. Narasimha Murthy and Others Vs. Karnataka Public Service Commission ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-23-2000
Reported in: ILR2000KAR1821; 2000(4)KarLJ97
ORDER1. Since the questions raised in these petitions are similar and identical, all these petitions are taken up for final hearing together and disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioners, in these petitions, were all applicants for recruitment to the post of Gazetted Probationers Groups-A and B in the services of the State. The recruitment to the post of Gazetted Probationers is made as provided under the provisions of the Karnataka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Appointment by Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules').3. In these petitions, the petitioners have called in question the endorsement issued to them by the Karnataka Public Service Commissionat Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission'), informing them that their applications for Gazetted Probationers (Main) Examination were rejected as they had not enclosed Bachelor Degree Marks Card and they had enclosed only Master's Degree certificate.4. In Writ Petition ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohandas N. Hegde Vs. State of Karnataka and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-23-2000
Reported in: II(2000)ACC583; ILR2000KAR1449; 2000(4)KarLJ20
1. The appellant herein challenged the validity of Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation (Amendment) Act, 1997 contending that the same is unconstitutional as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It was contended by the appellant that in respect of motor cars and jeeps exceeding 1500 cc attached with trailer, the lifetime tax is Rs. 24,000/-but in case where the cost of the vehicle exceeds Rs. 6 lakhs, the tax prescribed is Rs. 45,000/- and therefore there was no rational basis for fixing higher tax liability. The learned Single Judge by order dated 29-6-1999 held that the vehicle costing Rs. 6 lakhs and above constitute a different class by itself and therefore it cannot be said that there is discrimination in the levy of tax and therefore provisions cannot be considered to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and accordingly dismissed the writ petition. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, the appellan...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »