Karnataka Court March 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.
A.J.C. Estates and ors. Vs. the Coffee Board
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-12-2003
Reported in: [2004]138STC557(Kar)
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The appellants are the coffee growers from the State of Tamil Nadu and they filed the writ petitions Nos. 2153 to 2169 of 1995 calling in question the power of the Coffee Board to deduct purchase tax at the rate over and above what is prescribed by the Government of Tamil Nadu while fixing the price of the coffee payable to the growers of coffee in the State of Tamil Nadu. The appellants have prayed for the following reliefs in the writ petitions :(1) Declare that the Board can only deduct purchase tax at the rate specified by respective State Governments ;(2) Declare that the executive action of the Coffee Board in deducting purchase tax in excess of the amount levied by the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act as being ultra vires the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, without authority of law, arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the provisions of the Constitution of India ;(3) Direct the Board to refund such amounts illegally withheld by them with interest thereon.A ...
Bank Officers' Co-operative Housing Society Limited Vs. State of Karna ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KarLJ501
G.C. Bharuka, J. 1. The appellant is a Housing Co-operative Society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. In this intra-Court appeal, the appellant has questioned the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing its writ petition filed for quashing the notification dated 29-8-1994 (Annexure-F) issued by the State Government under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the 'L.A. Act'). By the impugned notification (Annexure-F), the Government has withdrawn from acquisition Sy. Nos. 14/6B measuring 37 guntas and 12/5B measuring 23 guntas of Tavarekere Village claimed to be owned by respondent 3-Mrs. Sharadamma (hereinafter referred to as the lands'). At the time of acquisition, Sri S.K. Venkateshappa, who is the husband of respondent 3, was the registered khatedar. Admittedly, after acquisition, the lands were allotted by the Bangalore Development Authority (in short, the 'Authority') to the appellant-society along with other lands under its...
Tiptur Taluk Agricultural Producers Co-operative Marketing Society Lim ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant307; ILR2003KAR1821; 2003(4)KarLJ18
Saldanha, J. 1. This group of appeals as also the connected Writ Petition all involves a common point of law of some importance namely the question as to whether the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has jurisdiction to decide a dispute relating to a monetary claim preferred by a member of the A.P.M.C. against a Co-operative Society or whether, under the A.P.M.C. Act it is the Disputes Redressal Committee of the A.P.M.C. that is invested with the jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute. The appellants before us as also the petitioners in the companion Writ Petition are the Tiptur Taluk Agricultural Producers Co-operative Marketing Society Limited. The disputes in question go back to the year 1994 and the brief facts are that the Society was required to receive from the respondents the agricultural produce brought by them for sale to the market yard which was in turn put up for sale in keeping with the procedures prescribed by the A.P.M.C. The price having been fixed, the Society was req...
M.N. Nagaraja Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)KarLJ70
S.R. Nayak, J.1. These writ appeals are directed against the common judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 29th February, 2000 in Writ Petition Nos. 39545 of 1995, 9991 to 9993, 11906 to 11910 and 10148 to 10151 of 1998, 20367 of 1997 and 11876 of 1999. The appellant is the writ petitioner in Writ Petition No. 39545 of 1995, 3rd respondent in Writ Petition Nos. 9991 to 9993, 10148 to 10151 of 1998, 20367 of 1997 and 11876 of 1999 and 4th respondent in Writ Petition Nos. 11906 to 11910 of 1998. The appellant herein filed Writ Petition No. 39545 of 1995 praying for certain reliefs including for a writ of mandamus that he is entitled to be promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer with effect from the date on which he was placed in charge of the post of Assistant Executive Engineer together with all benefits, pecuniary and otherwise. All other writ petitions were filed by the officers in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer calling in question the validit...
Sambhav Constructions Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant326; 2003(6)KarLJ243
ORDERN. Kumar, J. 1. The petitioner is a registered partnership firm carrying on the business of construction and engineering. The third respondent invited tenders for the construction of barrages across Bhima river at various places. The petitioner submitted his bid towards such tender by complying with all the formalities. The tenders were opened by the Executive Engineer of the third respondent on 8-11-2001. In all there were 17 bids. Out of these, 16 bids were opened at the first instance and thereafter the Executive Engineer adjourned the proceedings and later reconvened after an hour to open the 17th bid, namely, that of M/s. G.H. Reddy and Associates. The petitioner was the second lowest tenderer. The terms and conditions of the tender inter alia provide that the offer of the tenderer shall be valid upto 7-2-2002. The tenderers had to provide Bank guarantee and same has to be in force for a period of three months. As no decision was taken by the third respondent, they called upo...
Bangalore University Vs. K.S. Gurumurthy and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)KarLJ1
1. Writ Appeal Nos. 2782 and 2783 of 2002 are filed by the Bangalore University, the 1st respondent in W.P. Nos. 28860 and 28861 of 1995 and Writ Appeal Nos. 2575 and 2576 of 2002 are filed by K.R. Venugopal, the 3rd respondent in the said writ petitions. The appeals are filed against the common order dated 27-2-2002 passed by the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petitions in part.2. As the cases and facts involved are common in these cross-appeals, for convenience necessary facts in W.A. Nos. 2782 and 2783 of 2002 filed by Bangalore University are:The University Vishweshwaraiah College of Engineering, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'UVCE') is the college maintained and run by the appellant-University. The said college has various branches of engineering courses. The 1 st petitioner-K.S. Gurumurthy in W.P. Nos. 28860 and 28861 of 1995, was appointed as a Lecturer in the UVCE on 23-2-1983. The 1st petitioner has a Doctorate in Electronics. The 2nd petitioner-G.A. Nayak joine...
SharIn Dhiman Vs. the Common Entrance Test Cell and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)KarLJ271
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The petitioners herein are all students who appeared for CET-2002 examination conducted by the 1st respondent herein viz., the Common Entrance Test Cell on 9-5-2002 and 10-5-2002 which is a qualifying examination for seeking admission to a professional course in the State of Karnataka. All these petitioners are non-Karnataka students who had their 10+2 examination outside the State of Karnataka. The petitioners were informed by the 1st respondent that they have secured ranks as 134, 235, 219, 250, 227 and 240 respectively in the Medical Merit Order of the CET. They were called over for counselling and were allotted seats in the respective colleges, according to the merit. On the basis of the admission orders issued by the 1st respondent, the petitioners got themselves admitted in the respective colleges. Thereafter, they paid the necessary fee to the respective colleges and started attending the classes. But to their utter shock and surprise, on 30-9-2002, when the ...
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Joint Labour Commission ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1429; 2003(4)KarLJ43; (2003)IIILLJ450Kant
Nayak, J. 1. The Management of the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation' for short) feeling aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 4.10.1999 in Writ Petition No. 4033 of 1994 has preferred this writ Appeal. 2. The events leading to the filing of the Writ Petition be noted briefly as under:- The vehicles belonging to M/s. C.P.C. Limited, Mangalore, the 3rd respondent herein were taken over by the Government of Karnataka by virtue of the Karnataka Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1976 (For short the 'Act') and they were handed over to the Deputy General Manager and Divisional Controller, KSRTC, Hassan Division, Hassan. The predecessor of Respondents 2(a) to 2(e), namely, late Sri K. Madhava was an employee of the 3rd respondent as contemplated under Sub-section (3) of Section 19 of the Act and Sri K. Madhava was declared as employee of the appellant-corporation and as a result, late K. Madhava reported for duty as ...
Prof. M. Gurunath Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)KarLJ203
ORDERP. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. Since the questions raised in these petitions are similar and identical, all these petitions are heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. According to the averment of the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 37865 of 1995, he has been working as Selection Grade Lecturer in A.P.S. College of Arts and Science, N.R. Colony, Bangalore, since 1967; and he has also been working as a visiting Professor of Law at BMS College of Law. It is his further case that he has two sons who are studying PUC with Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Biology as optionals.3. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 35504 of 2001, states that he has been working as Lecturer in Sri M.V. Government Science College, New Town, Bhadravathi in the Department of Physics and that he has the teaching experience of eighteen years and is one of the eminent Lecturers in Physics subject. Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 5974 of 2002 claim to be the parents of students studying in diffe...
Prof. M. Gurunath and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, by Its Secretary, K ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR2343
ORDERVishwanatha Shetty, J. 1. Since the questions raised in these petitions are similar and identical, all these petitions are heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. According to the averment of the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 37865/1995, he has been working as Selection Grade Lecturer in A.P.S. College of Arts and Science, N.R. Colony, Bangalore since 1967; and he has also been working as a visiting Professor of Law at BMS College of Law. It is his further case that he has two sons who are studying PUC with Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Biology as optionals.3. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 35504/2001, states that he has been working as Lecturer in Sri M.V. Govt. Science College, new Town, Bhadravathi in the Department of Physics and that he has the teaching experience of eighteen years and is one of the eminent Lecturers in physics subject. Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 5974/2002 claim to be the parents of students studying in different classes in d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »