Karnataka Court May 2002 Judgments

Nav Maharashtra Chakan Oil Mill Ltd. Vs. Shivashakti Poultry Farm

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2002CriLJ4446

ORDERK. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. This petition filed under Section 482, Cr. P.C. for setting aside the order of XIII Addl. C.M.M., Bangalore in C.C. No. 14198/99. The said case came to be dismissed for default on 4.9.2000. A revision filed against the said order also came to be dismissed in Cr.R.P. No. 394/ 2000. From the records it discloses that a private complaint was filed under Section 200, Cr.P.C. against the respondent for committing an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Magistrate took cognizance, recorded the sworn statement and ordered issuance of process. In fact the process was paid on several occasions, however notice was not served. For non-payment of registered postal charges, the case wasdismissed. Incidentally, there was no representation also on that day.2. In this petition it is contended that the date was wrongly noted by the Counsel. However I find from the records that the procedure adopted by the Trial Court in insisting payment...

A.P. Madanna (Deceased) by L.Rs Vs. A.P. Kushalappa and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2002Kant439; 2002(6)KarLJ250

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 7th March, 2002 passed in Ex. C. No. 15 of 2001, wherein the Executing Court rejected the objections raised by some of the judgment-debtors as to the tenability of the execution.2. The said objections were raised mainly on two grounds; that the decree that had been drawn up pursuant to a compromise that had been entered into between the parties in the appeal before this Court had not been drawn up on stamp paper of sufficient value commensurate to the nature of transactions and the value of the properties which were the subject-matter of the decree and also on the ground that the said decree which had been drawn up pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties which had been presented for registration is beyond the period of four months, whereas as per Section 23 of the Registration Act it should have been presented for registration within 4 months from the date of the decree....

The Manager, Asian Paints (India) Limited Vs. the Inspector of Legal M ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2002CriLJ3869; 2002(6)KarLJ481

ORDERK. Sreedhar Rao, J. 1. The petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. for quashing of the proceedings in C.C. No. 15202 of 1997 on the file of the VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore. The Inspector of Legal Metrology has filed a complaint against the petitioner for contravention of Rules 4, 6 and 23(1) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred as the 'rules'). The respondent on 26-4-1997 inspected the shop of one Agarwal Private Limited at 12.30 p.m. who was dealing in paints. The paint manufactured by the petitioner-company is marketed in a tin was seized as it contained a sticker displaying the price of the article. Besides that, there was otherprinted information on the tin. The respondent in the complaint submits that affixture of sticker to display the price is in contravention of Rules 4, 6 and 23(1) of the Rules. The Magistrate took cognizance and issued process. The petitioner has appeared bef...

Latha Wines Vs. Government of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2002]128STC510(Kar)

ORDERK. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. Sri S.G. Rajendra Reddy, High Court Government Pleader, takes notice for the State.2. This revision petition is filed under Section 397, Criminal Procedure Code, praying to quash the order dated December 29, 2001 passed in C.Mis. No. 28 of 2000 on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC (Junior Division), Holenarsipura taluk. Towards recovery of sales tax dues, prosecution was launched under Section 13(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, as a fine. After issuance of notice, the petitioner appeared before the trial court, raised objection that the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to levy fine is not more than Rs. 3,000 and he has no jurisdiction to recover Rs. 35,000 as fine.3. The JMFC, Holenarsipura, has rightly taken the view that the objection taken is untenable. The provisions of Section 13(1) and 13(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act to the extent necessary for reference are extracted hereunder :'13. Payment and recovery of tax.--(1) The tax or any other amou...

A.P. Madanna (Deceased) by L.Rs. Vs. A.P. Kushalappa and ors.

Court: Karnataka

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J. 1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 7th March, 2002 passed in Ex. C. No. 15/01, wherein the Executing Court rejected the objections raised by some of the judgment debtors as to the tenability of the execution.2. The said objections were raised mainlyon two grounds: that the decree that hadbeen drawn up pursuant to a compromisethat had been entered into between the parties in the appeal before this Court had notbeen drawn up on stamp paper of sufficientvalue commensurate to the nature of transactions and the value of the propertieswhich were the subject matter of the decree and also on the ground that the saiddecree which had been drawn up pursuantto the compromise entered into between theparties which had been presented for registration is beyond the period of four months,whereas as per Section 23 of the Registration Actit should have been presented for registration within 4 months from the date of thedecree. 3. The Executin...

H.S. Rangaramu Vs. the Management of Karnataka State Road Transport Co ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2002(94)FLR592]; ILR2002KAR2768; 2002(5)KarLJ538; (2002)IIILLJ32Kant

ORDERN.K. Jain, C.J.1. The matter has been referred to this Full Bench as per the directions of the Chief Justice and has come up before us.2. The matrix of the case leading upto this reference in brief are that the petitioner was working with the 1st respondent-Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation ('KSRTC' for short), for the last 15 years before the filing of this petition. On the allegation that the petitioner remained absent from duty from 7-11-1997 to 7-1-1998, the Divisional Commissioner (Disciplinary Authority) of the 1st respond ent-KSRTC, by order dated 13-4-1999, terminated the services of the petitioner-workman. An industrial dispute was raised under Section 10(4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act ('ID Act' for short), which was registered as LID. No. 179 of 1999. After the pleading, the Labour Court posted the matter for recording the evidence on the validity of the domestic enquiry. In the meanwhile the order of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Division...

The Management of Siruguppa Sugars and Chemicals Limited Vs. C.S. Moha ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2002(6)KarLJ125

ORDERS.R. Bannurmath, J.1. The petitioner-management of M/s. Siruguppa Sugars and Chemicals Limited, Gouribidanur, has assailed the correctness of the order dated 17-6-1997 (Annexure-T) passed by the II Additional Labour Court, Bangalore, in I.D, No. 90 of 1994 on the preliminary issue holding that the domestic enquiry held is not fair and proper. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows.--The 1st respondent who was the workman of the petitioner was, by the order dated 1-3-1993, transferred to the Administrative Office, which, it is alleged, has been refused by him. Thereafter, in spite of the transfer (copy of the transfer order has been displayed on the notice board) and even the workman has been relieved on 21-6-1993, he did not report for duty at the Administrative Office. This act of refusal to accept and act on the transfer order and in not reporting to duty at the Administrative Office is taken serious note and as such a show-cause notice dated 2-7-1993 was issued to the wo...

N.K. Ramaswamy Iyengar and anr. Vs. Bangalore District and Bangalore R ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2002CriLJ3502; ILR2002KAR3936

ORDERS.R. Bannurmath, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings in P.C.R. No. 1111 of 1999 (C.C. No. 30083 of 2000), on the file of the XIII Additional C.M.M., Bangalore.2. The brief facts for consideration are as follows:A cheque for a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs issued by Vyalikaval House Building Co-operative Society Limited, Bangalore, bearing signatures of the petitioners issued to the respondent-Bangalore District and Bangalore Rural District Co-operative Central Bank Limited, Bangalore, came to be dishonoured with an endorsement--insufficient funds. As such, the payee of the cheque (respondent), after complying with the requirements of issue of notice for settlement, lodged a complaint under Section 200, Criminal Procedure Code against the petitioners seeking prosecution for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned Magistrate after taking the cognizance, recorded the sworn statement o...

C.N. Nagendra Singh Vs. the Special Deputy Commissioner and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2002KAR2750; 2002(6)KarLJ391

N.K. Jain, C.J. 1. A learned Single Judge of this Court has made this reference vide order dated 30-11-2001 passed in W.P. No. 19065 of 2001, to a larger Bench, to explain the scope, power and jurisdiction of the Revenue Officer under the provisions of Sections 127 to 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short the 'Act'), in view of the judgment in Lakshmi v. Assistant Commissioner, 1996(6) KLD 255. Therefore, by order dated 1-4-2002 passed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, this reference is placed before us on 8-4-2002.2. Brief facts leading to the order of reference, as alleged, are:Lands bearing Sy. Nos. 38/1, 39 and 41 situated at Chunchanaghatta Village, Bangalore South Taluk, originally belonged to late Hari Singh, the grandfather of the petitioner. Sri Hari Singh died on 13-4-1979, bequeathing the above said lands in favour of the petitioner under a Will dated 12-10-1959. The petitioner made an application for change of mutation in his name in respect of the aforesaid la...

B.A. Srinivasa Guptha and ors. Vs. State by Superintendent of Police, ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2002CriLJ4540; ILR2002KAR3185; 2003(2)KarLJ445

ORDERS.R. Bannurmath, J. 1. These two petitions are filed for quashing the proceedings in Crime No. 138 of 2000 and later case registered in C.C. No. 2388 of 2000 on the file of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.2. In order to understand the rival contentions of both the sides it is necessary to look into the facts giving rise to the present proceedings. 3. The undisputed facts chronologically were as follows.-(1) One Smt. Rathnamma, contesting respondent herein, had filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Cr. P.C. against the petitioners/accused herein on 16th December, 1997 for various offences, like, under Sections 307, 506, 463, 464, 470, 466, 468, 295, 324, 327, 365 and 347 all read with Sections 141 and 144 of the IPC. (2) On receipt of the complaint the learned Magistrate referred the same to the jurisdictional police for investigation and enquiry under Section 156(3) of the Cr. P.C. (3) On receipt of the same the jurisdictional police regi...