Karnataka Court March 2003 Judgments
D.S. Srinivas Vs. Ito
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: [2003]129TAXMAN657(Kar)
ORDER1. Petitioner in this petition is challenging an order passed by the Commissioner Annexure-G dated 12-3-1999.2. Petitioner assessee filed his returns for the assessment year 1994-95 declaring the income at Rs. 41,550. He claimed depreciation on motor vehicle in terms of section 32(1) of the Act. It was accepted. Even in the regular assessment after verification of the books of account, statement and other particulars filed by the petitioner, the claim was allowed in terms of the order dated 17-4-1995. Thereafter a notice under section 154 was issued by the first respondent proposing to rectify the assessment made under section 143(3) of the Act in respect of depreciation. Objections were filed. Thereafter an order was passed withdrawing the depreciation granted to the petitioner. A representation was filed and the petitioner was unsuccessful in filing the representation. An order in terms of Annexure-G was passed. Annexure-G is challenged in this petition.3. Sri Sarangan, learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Chunilal B. Shah Vs. Smt. Shanthakumari
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KarLJ592
ORDERA.V. Srinivasa Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, an octogenarian, aggrieved by the order of eviction suffered by him on 27th September, 1997 preferred the present revision petition and after nearly six years the question whether the landlady would succeed in her endeavour and realise the fruits of this long drawn legal battle waged by her to recover the possession of her property from her never-say-die tenant is to be determined now, in this revision, nearly one and half decades after she first moved the Court below for relief.2. Of that there could be no doubt that this legal battle was fought passionately and bitterly, at times the parties going for each other's jugular veins the tenant taking the lead in this regard by filing an application under Section 340(2) read with Section 195(1)(b) of the Cr. P.C. for holding a preliminary inquiry as to the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 193 and 209 of the IPC by the landlord, followed closely by a similar application by th...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka Vs. Raju
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2077; 2003(4)KarLJ186
Kumar Rajaratnam, J . 1. This is an appeal against the acquittal preferred by the State. The State being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court in Sessions Case 51/1997, on the file of the Sessions judge, Uttara Kannada, Karwar, has preferred this appeal against the acquittal.2. The prosecution case in brief as follows:The accused was working as a Mason and was also doing construction work at different places. The accused had taken up some construction work for P.W.15. The accused in turn entrusted the work to the deceased-Durgappa on payment of a commission. 3. On the date of occurrence i.e., 7.6.1997, the accused went to the site of the construction work and demanded his commission from the deceased. The accused demanded Rs. 2,000/-. The deceased did not agree to pay the said sum of Rs. 2,000/- to the accused. The accused returned to his house. The deceased and his wife-P.W.5 also came back to their house. 4. Sometime later, after taking food the deceased ...
Tag this Judgment!iraganteppa Ailas Veeragantappa Vs. Hanumanth and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR3035
Saldanha, J 1. We have heard the learned Counsel for the contesting parties as also the learned Government Advocate on merits. An interesting point of law has been canvassed in this Writ Appeal and it concerns the interpretation of Section 43-A of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. The allegation against the present appellant who was elected to the Panchayat from a reserved seat is that he had contested in the election on the representation that he belongs to Simpi Caste but the Respondent No.1 has brought it to the notice of the authorities at different levels that the appellant is a Lingayat, 3036 INDIAN LAW REPORTS 2003 KARNATAKA SERIES ILR Iraganteppa @ Veeragantappa vs Hanumanth & Ors. 3035 that there is documentary evidence in relation to his school certificate to this effect and that he has made a positively false statement to the Caste Verification Committee and obtained a caste certificate to the effect that he belongs to the Simpi caste with the sole purpose of contesting...
Tag this Judgment!N. Narasimhaiah Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corporation and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)KarLJ164
ORDERR.V. Raveendran, J.1. These cases involving a common question of law are heard together by consent. The facts of each of these cases are given below briefly.Re: W.P. NOS. 37209 and 37907 of 20001.1 An industrial concern by name A.P. Rocks Private Limited borrowed certain amount from the Karnataka State Financial Corporation, the first respondent ('KSFC' for short). The petitioners in these two petitions viz., N. Narasimhaiah and K. Rajan offered their respective properties bearing No. 59 (old No. 55), Annammadevi Temple Extension, Division No. 22, Subedar Chatram Road, Bangalore and House No. 49, House list Khata No. 100A, Mannarayana Palya, Cholanayakanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, as collateral security in favour of KSFC, as guarantors for repayment of the amounts advanced to A.P. Rocks Private Limited. As the borrower committed default, KSFC passed an order dated 20-11-2000 under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (for short, 'SFC Ac...
Tag this Judgment!N. Narasimahaiah and ors. Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corporation, R ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant46; I(2004)BC49; ILR2003KAR3344; [2004]52SCL370(Kar)
ORDERRaveendran, J.1. These cases involving a common question of law are heard together by consent. The facts of each of these cases are given below briefly.Re: W.P. Nos. 37209 & 37907 /2000:1.1) An industrial concern by name A.P. Rocks Pvt. Ltd. borrowed certain amount from the Karnataka State Financial Corporation, the first Respondent ('KSFC' for short). The petitioners in these two petitions viz., N. Narasimhaiah and K. Rajan offered their respective properties bearing No. 59 (old No. 55), Annammadevi Temple Extension, Division No. 22, Subedar Chatram Road, Bangalore and House No. 49, House list khata No. 100A, Mannarayana Palya, Chalanayakanahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, as collateral security in favour of KSFC, as Guarantors for repayment of the amounts advanced to A.P. Rocks Private Ltd. As the borrower committed default, KSFC passed an order dated 20.1.2000 under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (for short 'SFC Act') directing that ...
Tag this Judgment!iragantappa Alias Veeragantappa Vs. Hanumanth and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(6)KarLJ342
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. We have heard the learned Counsels for the contesting parties as also the learned Government Advocate on merits. An interesting point of law has been canvassed in this writ appeal and it concerns the interpretation of Section 43-A of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. The allegation against the present appellant who was elected to the Panchayat from a reserved seat is that he had contested in the election on the representation that he belongs to Simpi Caste but the respondent 1 has brought it to the notice of the authorities at different levels that the appellant is a Lingayat, that there is documentary evidence in relation to his school certificate to this effect and that he has made a positively false statement to the Caste Verification Committee and obtained a caste certificate to the effect that he belongs to the Simpi Caste with the sole purpose of contesting on a reserved seat. The respondent 1-complainant had further pointed out that apart from wrongfully...
Tag this Judgment!Ganapathi Parameshwara Bhat (Deceased) by L.Rs Vs. State of Karnataka ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)KarLJ425
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioners, assailing the legality and validity of the order passed by the 2nd respondent-Land Tribunal, dated 22-11-2002 in No. LRM.SR.48C/10/765 appointing Tahsildar, Honavar, as the receiver of the lands bearing Survey Nos. 4/4, 3/1 and 299/1 measuring O.16 guntas 4 annas, 11 guntas and 1 acre 1 gunta respectively, situated at Karki Village, Honavar Taluk, U.K. District, have filed this writ petition.2. The petitioners claim to be absolute owners of the lands in question and they are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. The lands in question fell to their share in the partition entered into between the family members and in pursuance of the partition, the petitioners submitted a wardy to the revenue authorities on 21-3-1983 along with other family members. Thereafter, mutation has been certified in respect of these lands in question and the petitioners' name have been entered in the Record of Rights and the same is continued till date. To subs...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Lakshmi Keshava Chemicals P. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1013
Nayak, J1. The Karnataka Electricity Board (for short the 'Board') being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 15.10.1999 in W P Nos. 22241-42/97 and the batch of cases has preferred these batch of writ appeals. The respondents herein are the writ petitioners.2. The background facts of the case are as follows:-The writs petitioners are the consumers of electricity supplied by the Board and they fall under L.T. 5 category. The Board in the year 1997 revised and refixed the tariff. Being aggrieved by fixation of tariff, the above Writ Petitions were filed in this Court in W.P. Nos. 22241-42/97. The petitioners prayed for the following reliefs:-'WHEREFORE, the petitioner prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent not to collect the line minimum charges as the same is illegal and without authority of law.(b) And pass such other order this Hon'ble Court deems fit on the facts and circumstances ...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Director, K.S.R.T.C. Vs. S. Nagaraj
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-25-2003
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR1099]; ILR2003KAR1416; 2003(3)KarLJ10; (2003)IILLJ747Kant
1. This appeal is filed by the appellant-Corporation, challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge and also the award passed by the Tribunal.2. Though the matter was listed for admission, with consent of both sides, taken for final hearing and heard. It is submitted for the Corporation that when the domestic enquiry was held to be fair and proper, the Labour Court was required to consider the records of enquiry besides the finding arrived at in the domestic enquiry but, without doing so, mainly on the ground that M.W. 1 was not offered for cross-examination, the Labour Court wrongly proceeded to hold charge as not proved observing that no oral or documentary evidence was adduced by the Corporation to prove the misconduct and so also the learned Single Judge and as such, interference by this Court is required. On the other hand, it is submitted for the respondent that when the Labour Court has recorded its finding on the basis of evidence available before it, it cannot be sa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »