Karnataka Court December 2003 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.
Ennamuri Subharao and ors. Vs. Bar Council of India, Rep. by Its Secre ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1682
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioners in these petitions have sought for a declaration, to declare that, the petitioners are entitled to pursue their course of study in the third respondent - College in the absence of any order under Rule 13(j) of the Bar Council of India Rules, which has been set aside by this Court on 2nd September 2003 in W.P. No. 26081/2003 vide Annexure-E. Further, they have sought for a direction, to direct the second respondent- University to permit the petitioners' appearance in the Examinations conducted at the end of the academic term and pursue their course of study without reference to, or giving effect to the communication dated 17th April 2003 vide Annexure D.2. The brief facts of the case are as hereunder; -The petitioners herein are all students alleged to have been admitted to first year of 3 years LL.B. course for the academic year 2003-2004 in the third respondent -College. The petitioners are alleged to have undergone the necessary course or study a...
State Vs. Kalista Desoza
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-18-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1964
M.F. Saldanha, J. 1. We have heard the learned Govt. Pleader on merits and we have also heard the learned counsel who represents the respondent-accused. Prima facie, we were impressed by the initial submission of the learned Govt. Pleader that this is a case in which admittedly an injury of some seriousness has occurred. There can be little dispute about the fact that the injury was inflicted by the accused and the trial Court has essentially proceeded on the basis of various infirmities in the record and acquitted the accused and it did appear to us that the case does require interference.2. The respondent's learned counsel has pointed out an entirely different facet to us which essentially hinges on a point of law, We need to also record that he has very effectively and very competently demonstrated that the nature of the incident will have to be seen and the Court will also have to evaluate one fact, namely, that the accused was hopelessly out numbered because P. W. 1 had come along...
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Abdul Rahiman and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR372
ORDERK. Bhakthavatsala, J. 1. The petitioner/KSRTC is before this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs:1. to call for the records;2. to issue a Writ, Order or direction of writ certiorari to quash theorder at Annexure-A made in No. KA/CC/APL 62/STA dated15-7-2003 passed by Respondent No. 3; and3. to grant such order reliefs as this court deems fit in thecircumstances of the case.2. The Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are represented by the learnedGovernment Pleader Sri. Phalakshaiah. Notice to Respondent No. 1 isdispensed with.3. At the very outset, it is contended by the learned GovernmentPleader that there is an alternative, efficacious remedy available to thepetitioner, but the petitioner has not yet exhausted the same.4. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner may be stated asunder:The first respondent filed an application seeking grant of contract carriage permit on the route Chikkamagalur. It is the case of the petitioner t...
Smt. Kavitha Dilip Patil and ors. Vs. Ananda Gnanu Patil and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: II(2004)ACC221; 2004ACJ1000; ILR2004KAR461; 2004(2)KarLJ569; (2004)IILLJ637Kant
ORDERN.K. Jain, C.J.1. This Reference has been placed before this Full Bench as per the order of the Chief Justice, dated 31.10.2003, and has come up before us.2. M.F.A. No. 1910/97 has been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short the WC Act) against the judgment and award dated 12.2.97 in WCA:SR:111/95 for enhancing the compensation. The learned Single Judge on admitting the case found that the Division Bench of this Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE v. VALAWWA, : (1994)ILLJ433Kant has not taken into consideration another judgment of this Court in the case of NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD v. RAJA NAIKA, : ILR1992KAR1325 wherein it was held that the Insurance Company can defend itself with all the defences available under Section 149(2) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called the MV Act). The matter was referred to a Division Bench vide order dated 19.8.2003. The Division Bench considering that the two decisions appeared to be in conflict, referred the...
Kalasa Tea Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Kar)428; ILR2004KAR482; [2004]267ITR29(KAR); [2004]267ITR29(Karn)
ORDERShwanatha Shetty, J.1. In these petitions filed under Section 55(1) of the Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') has called in question for correctness of the Order dated 16th October 1995 made in No. AIR SR 1/95/96 by the Commissioner of Agriculture Income Tax, Karnataka, Bangalore, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-M to these Petitions.2. Facts in brief may be stated as hereunder:The assessee is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 in the State of Tamilnadu and has interalia tea plantation in the district of Chickmagalur in the State of Karnataka. The assessee had filed its return of agricultural income in Form No. 3 under the Act for the assessment years 1981-82, 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1984-85. The Assessing Authority, on consideration of the return filed by the assessee, passed an order of assessment dated 31st May 1989 under Sect...
Yuvaraja Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wodeyar Vs. N.V. Mahadevappa (Dec ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1492; 2004(2)KarLJ553
K.L. Manjunath, J.1. The property of erstwhile his Highness Maharaja of Mysore, is the subject-matter of these two appeals. R.S.A. No. 840 of 1999 is filed by the defendant 2. R.S.A. No. 488 of 1999 is filed by the purchasers from the appellant in R.S.A. No. 840 of 1999, who have purchased the property during the pendency of the appeal before the lower Appellate Court.2. One N.V. Mahadevappa filed a suit in O.S. No. 43 of 1974 on the file of Civil Judge, Mysore against Shri Yuvaraja Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wodeyar Trust, represented by its Secretary, H.N. Palegar, Secretary of Mysore Palace Trust, Mysore, contending that the suit property originally belonged to Shri Yuvaraja Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wodeyar's Trust, Mysore and that he had taken the premises on lease on a monthly rent of Rs. 175- and has been in possession of the same by paying the monthly rent very regularly throughout. It is further averred that the defendant Shri Yuvaraja Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wodeyar Tr...
Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Company Law Board
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: [2005]126CompCas261(Kar); ILR2004KAR4447; [2004]51SCL251(Kar)
S.R. Nayak, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the Management of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Limited under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956, for short, 'the Act', challenging the order dated 27-8-2003 passed by the Company Law Board (CLB), Southern Region Bench, Chennai, represented by its Chairman, the 1st respondent herein, disposing of the appellant's Company Petition No. 468/141/SRB/2003 filed before them, without granting the relief sought under Section 141 of the Act for condoning delay in the matter of filing satisfaction of charge under Section 138 of the Act.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are - The appellant-company was incorporated on 18-7-1966 under the Act. It was originally under the management of the Government of Karnataka and was taken over by the present management (UB group) in 1990 under a Rehabilitation Package formulated by the Government of Karnataka, financial institutions and banks. It is stated that the package could not be implemented in its ent...
Escorts Limited and ors. Vs. the Regional Director, E.S.i. Corporation
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR1107]; ILR2004KAR2996; (2004)IIILLJ200Kant
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two different orders passed by the Employees State Insurance Court in Bangalore whereby the said Court has held Efficiency Incentive/Bonus paid to the employees of the appellants-companies to be wages within the meaning of Section 2(22) of the ESI Act and consequently upheld the demand raised by the Corporation for payment of contribution. Since the question that falls for consideration is common to both the cases, the same have been heard and shall stand disposed of by this common Order.2. In terms of an Order passed by the Deputy Regional Director of the ESI Corporation, contributions were demanded from the appellant - Escorts Ltd., on several items of expenditure like amounts spent on building maintenance, incentive payments, machinery repairs and wages paid to the employees of the transport contractors. By another Order, similar contributions were levied on the amounts spent by the appellants managements towards subsistence allo...
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. C.N. Ananthram
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Kar)422; ILR2004KAR4680
P. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. This appeal is by the Revenue. In this appeal, filed under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the appellant has called in question the correctness of the order dt. 29th March, 2001, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal'), in Misc. Petition No. 88/Bang/1999 in ITA No. 744/Bang/1998.2. The facts of the case in brief which are relevant for the purpose of disposal of this appeal may be stated as follows:The assessee was the owner of a residential site No. 4 (old No. 71), 4th main, Sripuram Extension, Seshadripuram, Bangalore, having acquired the same as a result of family settlement. The assessee started putting up construction of ground floor, first floor and second floor on the site in question. The construction was completed in the year 1994-95 at a total cost of Rs. 17.40 lakhs, the breakup as under :Rs.Ground floor 8.40 lakhs;First floor 4.25 lakhs;Second fl...
Vishwanatha and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR2828
S.R. Bannurmath, J.1. These two appeals arise from the common judgment dated 27.11.2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Uttarakannada, Karwar in S.C. No. 55 of 2002 (original S.C NO. 8 of 1979), finding the accused guilty of the offences punishable Under Section 302 & 326 I.P.C and sentencing him to life imprisonment for the offence Under Section 302 I.P.C., and simple imprisonment of three years for the offence under Section 326 of I.P.C. It is to be noted here itself that though the offence took place in the year 1979, because of the unsoundness mind, deaf and dumb handicap of the accused, he was kept under observation in Mental Institute almost for a period of 22 years and only after the doctor's certificate that the accused is in a fit condition to face the trial, the trial took place in the year 2002. Even though the Trial Judge did not give emphasis to the plea of guilt admitted by the accused at the time of framing and hearing of the charge, nevertheless the Court proceede...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »