Karnataka Court February 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.
Khanderao Subbarao Nadagir Vs. Hulagavva and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-05-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant354
D.V. Shylendra Kumar 1. The plaintiff in O.S. 153/82 on the file of the Court of the Additional Munsif and II Addl. J.M.F.C., Ranebennur, whose attempt to obtain a decree for directing the defendants for specific performance of an agreement for conveying the subject immovable property -- a shop in Ranebennur Town, did not succeed before the trial Court as well as before the Lower Appellate Court, is in second appeal before this Court. 2. The plaintiff had brought the suit praying for directions to defendants 1 to 4 and 6 and 9 to execute a registered sale deed in respect of the suit property by receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs. 7,000/-which the plaintiff claims as had been paid under an agreement dated 21-8-1979 between the plaintiff and one Fakirappa Joger who was no more and as such had impleaded his legal representatives as defendants to the suit. The plaintiff had also pleaded in the alternative for the refund of the earnest money and damages by way of interest on thi...
M. Nagaraj Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KarLJ486
1. We have heard the learned Counsels representing the parties and the learned Government Advocate on merits. A very limited relief has been sought in this appeal which is directed against an order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 37703 of 1999, dated 13-12-1999. The learned Single Judge had set aside the election of the office-bearers and had directed a fresh election but while doing so, the observation in paragraph 10 of the order was to the effect that the provisions of Section 29-A of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 prescribe that the Committee shall be deemed to have been validly constituted if it consists of the majority of elected members. In the present instance, having regard to the disqualifications that had taken place that there were only seven persons who continued validly on the Committee and out of them, since four were present the contention raised was that the Committee had been validly constituted for purposes of holding the election. The ...
Smt. V. Manjula Vs. Commissioner for Food and Civil Supplies in Karnat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant238; 2003(5)KarLJ367
ORDERH. Rangavittalachar, J.1. The Deputy Commissioner for Food & Civil Supplies, Davangere - 2nd respondent herein, by a notification dated 16-3-1999, invited applications for grant of authorization to run a fair price depot in Neelagunda Village, Harapanahally Taluk. Petitioner herein among others, had filed his applications. The petitioner was selected and was granted the authorisation. 2. The 4th respondent herein who is the President of the Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Bank Ltd. challenged the said grant of authorisation by filing an appeal under Rule 17(1) of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order 1992 (Referred to as PDS Order for brevity) before the Commissioner for Food & Civil Supplies. The appellate authority has set aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner holding that the grant of authorisation will have the effect of depriving some of the cards allotted to the 4th respondent as they were transferred to the petitioner. Besides, it was a...
Gopal Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR3686; 2003(4)KarLJ537
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. One Vittal Rukka Kemarpant filed Form 7 before the Land Tribunal for grant of occupancy rights in Sy. No. 119 of Kadasalli Village, Yellapur Taluk. The Land Tribunal by its order dated 20-12-1978 granted occupancy rights. The 3rd respondent filed Appeal No. 269 of 1986 against the said order. While the Revenue Member of the Appellate Authority concurred with the order of the Land Tribunal, the Judicial Member took a different view.2. In view of the conflicting views among the members of the Appellate Authority, the matter was referred under Section 116-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act to the opinion of the local Civil Judge. The Civil Judge by his order dated 7-1-1988 in C. Misc. No. 97 of 1987 concurred with the view of the Judicial Member. Based on the majority decision, the Appellate Authority by its order dated 23-1-1988 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Land Tribunal. By that time the original applicant had expired. The proceedings had...
United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Ibrahim and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: III(2003)ACC604
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. We have heard the learned Counsels representing the two Insurance Companies as also the claimants in these two appeals. The two incidents raise a common ground of appeal namely the question as to whether the Tribunal was justified in holding the Insurance Company liable. In the first of the cases, a death has occurred and in the second case injury was occurred and the liabilities are dissimilar. We do not need to go into the niceties or the factual details because the only point raised by the learned Counsel who represents the Insurance Company is that admittedly the incidents in question took place prior to the amendment in 1994 and at a point of time when the law envisaged mat a person traveling in a goods vehicle would not be covered and consequently, the liability of the Insurance Company cannot be invoked. Our attention was drawn to a recent decision of the Supreme Court dated 12.3.2002 in a group of civil appeals wherein the Supreme Court has virtually settled...
Kalpatharu Solvents Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corporatio ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant221; II(2003)BC677; [2003]114CompCas394(Kar); 2003(3)KarLJ478; [2003]46SCL87(Kar)
N.K. Jain, C.J. 1. This appeal by the writ petitioner is directed against the order dated September 24, 2002, in W. P. No. 28238 of 2002. 2. The brief necessary facts are that the appellant a private limited company, viz., Kalpatharu Solvents Pvt. Ltd., carrying on the business of manufacturing edible oils, with an intention to expand its business approached the respondent-Karnataka State Financial Corporation (for short 'KSFC') and borrowed a loan to the tune of Rs. 90 lakhs and another loan of Rs. 19.12 lakhs was sanctioned for establishment of small scale industry in 1982, subject to certain terms and conditions set out in the KSFC sanction communication letters dated August 27, 1992, and the respondents, in Miscellaneous No. 6/200 (annexure K to the writ petition), stood as personal guarantors for the repayment of loan amount in case of default and necessary documents were filed. As the appellant could not repay the loan amount in time, the KSFC issued a notice and seized the indus...
Hindusthan Photo Film Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. the State of Karnatak ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1815
ORDERBharuka, J.1. This revision has been filed under Section 23(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the Act' for short) is another example of avoidable litigation.2. The petitioner-assesses is the manufacturer of photographic materials, x-ray films, graphic art films, etc. During the assessment year 1993-94 it had sold the photograph films. The total turnover on this account was Rs. 45,17,758/-. Though till up to 1.4.1993 the rate of sales tax applicable on such transaction was 10% but from 1.4.1993 it was reduced to 4%. The assessee, in ignorance of this fact, collected sales tax at 10% on sale transactions. Subsequently on being objected to by one of the customers the assessee sought for clarification from the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes who by his letter dated 15.2.1994 clarified that the tax leviable is only 4%. But by the time the assessee had collected Rs. 2,71,065/- which was in excess of his tax liability and deposited the same with its monthly returns.3. After the ...
K.G. Mahalingaiah Vs. C.R. Rajagopala Setty
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KarLJ351
ORDERTirath S. Thakur, J. 1. This revision petition calls in question an order passed by the II Additional District Judge at Mysore, whereby among other revisions, Rent Revision No. 51 of 1994 filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and the order of eviction passed by the HRC Court upheld. 2. The respondent-landlord is the owner of a two storied building situate in the City of Mysore consisting of 7 shops on the ground floor and residential portions on the first floor. H.R.C. Nos. 231 to 234 of 1985, 74 and 76 of 1989 were filed by the landlord against the tenants in occupation of different parts of the premises on different grounds including the ground that the building in question was in mud masonry more than 100 years old which had developed cracks requiring immediate demolition and reconstruction. The I Additional Munsiff at Mysore who tried the said cases disposed off the same by a common order dated 8-12-1993 directing vacation of the tenants in occupation of the premises for ...
H. SirajuddIn Vs. Shaziya Alias Afsana and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant224; II(2003)DMC618
ORDERN.K. Patil, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 17-12-2002 passed by the III Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn.) Bellary on I. A. No. II in O. S. No. 223/2002 and also to dismiss the application filed by the 1st respondent.2. The respondents herein have filed I. A. II in O. S. No. 223/2002 before the trial court seeking interim maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- per month till the disposal of the suit from the petitioner herein.3. The brief facts of the case are as under :The petitioner is the husband of the 1st respondent and their marriage was performed as per the rites and customs of Muslim on 16-5-1996. After marriage she led happy marital life at Bellary and 2nd respondent is born out of their wedlock on 5-5-1998. After the birth of 2nd respondent, petitioner and his family members demand a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- to improve the business. When she refused to fulfil the demand, petitioner started harassment by without providing proper food and she has been put to m...
S. Gowrishankar Vs. the Secretary, Bar Council of India
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2772; 2003(5)KarLJ114
ORDERKumar, J. 1. The petitioner is working as Law Teacher in the Bangalore Institute of Legal Studies being run by B.H.S. Education Society. According to him, he is entitled for UGC scale as a matter of right. Since he was denied such right, he approached this Court by filing a Writ Petition in W.P. No. 26826/2000; The said Writ Petition is still pending consideration before this Court. Though the petitioner is entitled to the said UGC scale, as admitted by the respondent in the statement of objections in the aforesaid Writ Petition, the said benefit is not extended to him. Therefore, he has filed the Writ Petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Bar Council of India to exercise power vested in them under the Bar Council of India Rules and decline to grant of extension of approval of affiliation to the Bangalore Institute of Legal Studies. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends when once in the statement of objections filed in the Writ Petition pending ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »