Karnataka Court July 2002 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.
Dy. Cit Vs. H.V. Shantharam
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: [2002]123TAXMAN1093(Kar)
ORDERThe petitioner in this petition is the Deputy Commissioner. In this petition, the petitioner has called in question the correctness of the order dated 17-6-2002 passed by the Tribunal in Misc. Petition No. 54 of 2002, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-H to this petition.2. In this petition, Shri Indra Kumar, the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department challenging the correctness of the impugned order, mainly made three submissions. Firstly, he submitted that the order impugned is liable to be quashed on the ground that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order in the purported exercise of power conferred on it under sub-section (2) of section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act). Secondly, he submitted that the said order suffers from errors apparent on the face of the record inasmuch as the said order came to be passed in total disregard of the materials on record. He made several incid...
Somanath Vs. Vijayakumar and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)KarLJ10
1. This writ appeal is against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17th June, 2002 passed in W.P. No. 21020 of 2002 (Somanath v. Vijayakumar and Ors., 200(5) Kar. L.J. 4), dismissing the writ petition with costs holding that the direction to allow the application Annexure-G and H for disqualification as prayed in the petition cannot be given.2. It is alleged that the election to the Committee of 17 Members of Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee, Bijapur was held on 8-1-2000. Thereafter, the appellant was elected as Chairman of the Marketing Committee defeating respondent 1. It is alleged that the election of respondents 1 and 2 to the Committee is directly hit by Section 16(1)(a) of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (for short 'the Act') as they are traders and not agriculturists. It is stated that the appellant does not belong to the group of the 6th respondent, who is a District Minister. When the appellant-Chairman refused to post the n...
Poornaprajna Education Centre, Belur Vs. Pushpa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)KarLJ161
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J. 1. This revision petition is filed by the petitioner-private educational institute questioning the correctness of the order dated 25-10-1999 passed in EATMA No. 2 of 1998 by the learned Additional District Judge, Hassan, and has sought for setting aside the same and prayed for dismissal of the appeal urging various grounds.2. The respondent-teacher filed an appeal under Section 94 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 (for short 'Act 1983'), questioning the correctness of the order of termination dated 10-4-1998 passed by the petitioner urging various grounds. The petitioner-institution filed its written statement in justification of its order of termination inter alia contending that the respondent is not a permanent employee, as such no enquiry was required to be held to relieve her from her duty; that she was working on probation and the management of the institution took decision to relieve her and as such there is no illegality committed by the petitioner-i...
K. Anjaneya Setty Vs. K.H. Rangiah Setty
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-03-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Kant387; ILR2002KAR3613; 2002(4)KarLJ551
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The revision is filed against the order dated 15-12-1998 passed by the Trial Judge on the admissibility of document dated 24-6-1982 which is styled as 'Asthivihagada Vadambadike Kararu' which was sought to be marked by the defendant in his evidence. The point that arise for consideration in this revision is, whether the impugned order holding that the document dated 24-6-1982 cannot be received in evidence before the Court of law for want of stamp duty and registration is proper.2. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit O.S. No. 1045 of 1994 for the relief of declaration that the plaintiff is having half share in the suit schedule property and for partition and separate possession of his share by metes and bounds and for other consequential reliefs. His case was that under a registered partition deed dated 6-2-1968 all the properties of the joint family were divided between the plaintiff, the defendant and their father. In the said partition 'A' Schedule properties f...
Netley b Estate Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-03-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Kar)167; [2002]257ITR532(KAR); [2002]257ITR532(Karn)
Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. In all these appeals the constitutional validity of the Explanation to Section 26(4) of the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, introduced retrospectively with effect from April 1, 1975, by the Karnataka Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 1997 (Act No. 18 of 1997), falls for determination.2. The provisions of Section 26(4) and the Explanation thereto of the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, as amended by Act 18 of 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), read as follows :'26. (4) Where any business through which agricultural income is received by a company, firm or association of persons is discontinued or any such firm or association is dissolved in any year, any sum received after the discontinuance or dissolution shall be deemed to be income of the recipient and charged to tax accordingly in the year of receipt, if such sum would have been included in the total income of the person who carried on the business had such sum been received...
ibrahim Abdul Latif Shaikh Vs. Corporation Bank and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-03-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant98; 2003(2)ARBLR564(Kar); ILR2002KAR5386
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The appeal filed against the judgment and decree of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) in O.S. No. 20/2001. The appellant is the 2nd defendant in the suit. The first respondent Bank is the plaintiff filed suit for recovery of money by the appellant and second respondent who is the principal debtor for a sum of Rs. 1,17,990/- with interest and costs. The suit against the defendants came to be decreed. Being aggrieved, the 2nd defendant has filed this appeal.2. The loan was advanced to the second respondent by the first respondent for commissioning an ice-cream manufacturing unit. In that regard loan documents were obtained. The appellant stood as guarantor for the transaction. Ex. P.3 is the guarantee agreement. The first defendant who is the 2nd respondent has filed cross-objections. The Counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that the cross-objections may be dismissed for non-prosecution as he has not received any instructions from his client and some of the ob...
Chandramma and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)KarLJ600
ORDER1. These writ petitions are of the third round litigation by the landowners challenging the notifications issued under the Bangalore Development Authority Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. The Bangalore Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'BDA'), has issued a preliminary notification under Section 17(1) of the Act proposing to acquire certain lands for the purpose of implementation of the schemes called 'Gnanabharathi Layout, Banashankari V and VII Stages and J.P. Nagar'. In the first round of litigation, this Court quashed the final declaration issued under Section 19(1) of the BDA Act on the ground that no sanction was obtained under Section 18(3) of the Act before issuing final notification. However, liberty was reserved to the Authorities to proceed with the acquisition from the stage of preliminary notification. In the said judgment this Court has also permitted the landowners, who have not filed any objections, to file objections within 30 days from...
Prabhakar Rane Vs. Asnotikar Vasant Kamalakar and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Kant377; 2002(6)KarLJ336
ORDERS.R. Bannurmath, J.1. This election petition is filed questioning the election of the 1st respondent-Sri Vasant Kamalakar Asnotikar to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly from No. 172, Karwar Assembly Constituency. The petitioner and the 1st and 2nd respondents had contested in the General Election for constituting the 11th Karnataka Legislative Assembly and all these three candidates had contested from No. 172, Karwar Assembly Constituency segment. The petitioner contested as the candidate sponsored by Bharatiya Janatha Party, the 1st respondent as the candidate sponsored by Indian National Congress and the 2nd respondent sponsored by Janatha Dal. According to the petitioner, he has been contesting from No. 172, Karwar Assembly Constituency since 1983. According to him, in the years 1983, 1985 and 1993 he contested as the Indian National Congress candidate and got elected. However, in the election of 1994 he lost the election due to Anti-Establishment Movement and division in the ...
Government of India and ors. Vs. Dhanu S. Rathod
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: ILR2002KAR4911; 2003(1)KarLJ364
R.V. Raveendran1. The respondent was working as a Trained Graduate Teacher under the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghathan which is stated to be an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act, controlled by the Government of India. He was earlier working at Sanghathan's Kendriya Vidyalaya at Ponda and later posted to Kendriya Vidyalaya, Kudremukh. 2. On 24-5-2001 respondent was served with an order of termination dated 18/22-5-2001 passed by the second respondent (Commissioner of the Sanghathan) in exercise of power under Article 81(b) of the Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalayas, holding the respondent guilty of moral turpitude involving sexual offence and exhibition of immoral sexual behaviour towards the students of the Kendriya Vidyalaya, Kudremukh. The said order reads thus: 'Whereas, Shri D.J. Rathode, Trained Graduate Teacher (Biology), Kendriya Vidyalaya, Kudremukh has been prima facie found guilty of moral turpitude involving sexual behaviour due to his indulgence...
The Managing Director, Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Niyamith and ors. Vs. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Kant115
ORDERK. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The Revision is filed against the order of Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) Jewargi in O. S. No. 6/2000. The petitioners are the defendants and the respondent-plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the letter issued by the Technical Assistant Sub-Committee dated 19-5-1998 is null and void and not binding on the plaintiff and also seek perpetual injunction against the defendants not to act upon the letter.2. It is necessary to ruminate the material facts of the case to understand the crux of the dispute involved and the grievance of the parties. The plaintiff was assigned a contract work of construction of main UKP Jevargi Branch Canal. The total value of the contract is Rs. 64,79,000/- The contract was assigned after the acceptance of tender. The tender rates were quoted for excavation of the earth on the assumption that there was only a hard rock and as per the assessment of the Department, certain rate was quoted for excavation of the hard rock but during the e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›