Karnataka Court April 2001 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.
Raj Trust and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-04-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Kant472; ILR2001KAR5501
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. These petitions are filed by the petitioners, who have got registered the sale deeds in their favour in respect of their respective immovable properties by getting registered the same before the respective Sub-Registrars under the provisions of the Indian Registration Act. The petitioners, being aggrieved of the impugned orderspassed by the respective District Registrars for Detection of Under-valuation of Stamps under the provisions of Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (in short 'Act') have filed these petitions seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the respective District Registrars in exercise of their powers under Section 45-A(2) of the Act r/w. relevant Rules; and also for issuance of an appropriate direction to the respective District Registers to initiate proceedings against them for determination of the market value of the property as per the unamended provisions of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 read with the Karnataka Sta...
Nehru Smaraka Vidya Kendra's Sree Venkateswara Dental College and Hosp ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-03-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Kant337; ILR2001KAR3440
Ashok Bhan, J. 1. Being aggrieved with the following directions issued by the single Judge, Sree Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Uttarahalli, Bangalore, appellant No. 1, being administered by the Nehru Smaraka Vidya Kendra Trust-Appellant No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as appellants) have filed these appeals :'In the result, I allow these petitions and direct that the Registrar of Banglore University shall verify the availability of vacancies in other recognised Colleges in the State of Karnataka against which the petitioners may be transferred taking into consideration the choice of the candidates and his/ her merit at the time of admission to the first year of the Course. The transfer shall be against vacancies in the categories in which the petitioners were Initially admitted. The transferee colleges shall be entitled to recover from the petitioners the fee prescribed for any such category of students, the transfers permitted after verification of the vacancy position shal...
North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, Hubli Vs. Ramappa Ali ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-02-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)KarLJ534
1. Aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the MACT -VI, Bi-japur, M.V.C. No. 950 of 1995, dated 11-6-1998, KSRTC has come for-ward with the above appeal question in the finding of the negligence and also quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. The accident had occurred on 11-9-1995 at about 11.45 a.m. near Babaleahwar on Jamakhandi-Babaleshwara Road. It is alleged that on the date of accident the petitioner was travelling in a jeep bearing Registration No, KA-29-M-238, at that time KSRTC Bus bearing Registration No. KA-31-F-994 driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed to the jeep. As a result the petitioner sustained injuries as complained in the claim petition.3. The injuries sustained by the claimant/appellant are as follows: 1. Injuries to left palm joint and stomach. 2. Injuries to head and right leg. 4. This is evidenced by the wound certificate, Exs. P. 4 and 5 coupled with the evidence of the doctor, P.W. 3. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and docu...
Chetana Enterprises Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-02-2001
Reported in: [2001]123STC251(Kar)
ORDERM.F. Saldanha, J.1. These petitions throw up for decision a point of law that is not only unusual and interesting but one which is extremely fine or rather subtle. The majority of the facts are not in dispute. The petitions concern two assessment years and they are 1992-93 and 1993-94.2. The charge against the petitioners is identical, viz., that they ought not to have filed the declaration in form 37 in respect of the products that are the subject-matter of the dispute, viz., tamarind kernel (seeds) and tamarind powder. Admittedly, the assessees were purchasing the seeds in question and putting them through a process whereby they have been converted into powder. It was their contention that the seeds constitute an input in the manufacturing process of the tamarind powder and consequently, they filed the declaration in form 37 which entitled them to a lower rate of taxation, viz., 4 per cent instead of 8 per cent. The litigation went through different stages with which we are not ...
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Harjit Singh and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-02-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ1353
T.N. Vallinayagam, J.1. Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 14.1.2000 passed in M.V.C. No. 295 of 1996 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gulbarga, the K.S.R.T.C, has come forward with the above appeal challenging the finding on negligence and also the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal.2. The accident occurred on 27.8.1994 at about 10.30 a.m. near Naikal village in Shahapur Taluk. It is alleged that on the date of accident, petitioners-respondents herein were travelling in a Tempo bearing No. KA 33-984 and at that time K.S.R.T.C. bus bearing No. KA 32-F 110 came from the opposite side at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and both the vehicles collided against each other. As a result, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries.3. The claimant in this appeal is a linesman in K.E.B. and he has claimed a sum of Rs. 45,000 towards medical expenses, Rs. 50,000 for shock and mental agony, Rs. 15,00...
Gokul A.L. and ors. Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-02-2001
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ602Kant
ORDER1. The prayer in the writ petitions is as follows:'Wherefore, the petitioners abovenamed most respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to absorb the petitioners as permanent employees after their decasualisation at Bangalore Complex Factory, Doorvaninagar, Bangalore-16, and further be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to pay salary on par with the permanent employees with effect from October 19, 1992, on the date on which the junior- most were appointed as permanent employees, including the continuity of service and all other consequential benefits.'2. The learned counsel is not able to substantiate as to the nature of the prayer to bring it within the provisions of Article 226. Ultimately, he submitted that it can at best be a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the case of the petitioners for the purpose of absorbing them.3. Normally, such ambiguous prayer cannot be granted for considering the status of the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›