Karnataka Court September 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.
Smt. Pushpa and ors. Vs. the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1964
ORDERPatil, J.1. The petitioners assailing the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 7.2.2002 in No. DRM: B I :XSS: 148:2001-2002 (Annexure-C) passed by the 2nd respondent and the order dated 6.7.2002 in Appeal No. JRM:DAP: 12:2001 -2002(Annexure-F) passed by the 1st respondent, have presented this Writ Petition.2. The petitioners are the sitting Directors of the 4th respondent-society. The election was held in the year 2000 for the Committee of the 4th respondent and petitioners have been elected unanimously and they were functioning as directors. The said society earned profits of Rs. 55,000/- due to best administration of the petitioners. The Milk Federation has categorized the 4th respondent society as one of the best society for the entire Mysore District. When things stood thus, due to political pressure, 2nd respondent has initiated proceedings under Section 30(1) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 ('Act' for short) and issued show cause notice to the ...
The Chief Controlling Authority Vs. Texas Instruments India Limited
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Kant70; ILR2003KAR4386
ORDERN.K. Jain, C. J.1. This is a reference made under Section 54(1) of the Karnataka Stamp Act 1957 (hereinafter called 'the Act').2. The essential facts leading upto this reference are as follows:The instrument styled as lease deed dated 18.10.1996 executed by M/s. Golf View Homes a registered partnership firm as lessor and M/s. Texas Instruments India Limited as lessee, was presented for registration before Sub-Registrar Bangalore (South) Taluk. Said instrument is drawn up on stamp paper of Rs. 21,92,000/- Under the said document lessor has leased premises with 1,41,183 /- sq.ft. of the built up area for a period of 10 years on monthly rent of Rs. 11.25 per square foot for first 5 years and for next five years rent at escalation of 30%. The lessor received Rs. 3,81,19,410/- equal rent to rent for 24 months as a refundable security deposit which is repayable by the lessor and will be adjusted in the rental for the last two years of lease period. The rent reserved at agreed rate for t...
Karnataka State Co-operative Marketing Federation Vs. the Regional Dir ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR4422; (2004)ILLJ880Kant
Thakur, J. 1. This appeal under Section 82 of the ESI Act is directed against an Order made by the ESI Court at Bangalore whereby an application filed by the appellant under Section 75 of the Act aforementioned has been dismissed and the appellant held liable to pay contribution of a sum of Rs. 7,02,106.50/- for the period between 27.01.1985 to 31.3.1988.2. The appellant is a Co-operative Society in which the State Government is a major share holder. The Society is engaged in the marketing of fertilizers and pesticides to farmers in the State of Karnataka. It has for that purpose established 31 branches all over the State. The administrative and marketing control over these branches is exercised by the Head Office of the Society with the help of nearly 450 employees.3. The respondent - Corporation appears to have initiated proceedings in which the appellant - Society was called upon to pay the contribution in terms of the ESI Act. That demand was opposed by the appellant on the ground ...
Dr. M. Somashekar Vs. Management of M.S. Ramaiah Medical College and H ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)KarLJ509
ORDERM.F. Saldanha, J.1. The petitioner before me who is a senior Doctor, was at the relevant time holding the post of Professor and Head of the Department of Forensic Medicine, M.S. Ramaiah Medical College, Bangalore has assailed the validity of an order dated 20-1-2003 passed by the Educational Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in M.A. (EAT) No. 31 of 2002. The respondent-M.S. Ramaiah Medical College and Hospital, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the 'College'), passed an order dated 12-10-2002 whereby the services of the petitioner were terminated with immediate effect. Technically speaking, the order stated that the petitioner was given three months notice but in actual fact, the order took effect forthwith. The petitioner challenged the order through an appeal filed under Section 94 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983. On notice being issued to the College, a preliminary objection was raised with regard to the maintainability of the proceeding, the contention being that an appea...
Food Corporation of India Vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1201; [2004]138STC235(Kar)
ORDERP. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. Since these petitions are filed against the common Order dated 5th January 2000 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal [hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'], these petitions are taken up for hearing together and disposed of by this Order.2. The petitioner in these petitions is the Food Corporation of India [hereinafter referred to as 'the Assessee'] and a dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act']. In this petition filed under Section 23(1) of the Act, the assessee has called in question the correctness of the Order dated 5th January 2000 passed by the Tribunal. The Assessee is a Government of India undertaking established under the provisions of the Food . Corporation of India Act, 1964 [hereinafter referred to as 'the FCI Act']. It is claimed that the activities of the Assessee extends through out the Country and it is engaged in procurement, storage and release of essential food-g...
Consolidated Coffee Limited Vs. the District Registrar and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-16-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR781; 2003(6)KarLJ273
ORDERN.K. Jain, C.J. 1. This is a case referred by Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under Section 54 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (hereinafter called the 'Stamp Act').2. The essential facts of the case leading upto this case are as follows.-The petitioner herein which is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, agreed to take over a Tea Estate known as 'Glenlorna Tea Estate' comprised in different survey numbers situate in Poradu Village, T. Shettigeri Village and Nemmale Village of Virajpet Taluk, Kodagu District and measuring in all 942.56 acres. The said Tea Estate is leasehold granted by Government of Coorg under two lease deeds dated 1913-1914 and 1915-1916, for a period of 999 years. The property passed different hands and Coorg Tea Company Limited acquired leasehold right in the said Tea Estate and agreed to convey leasehold rights to the petitioner in the said Tea Estate for a consideration of Rs. 1,36,25,000/-. Being doubtful about the stamp duty to be paid o...
Vasudeva Murthy, Since Dead by His Lrs. and ors. Vs. Mariyappa, Since ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-16-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR4558; 2004(1)KarLJ277
ORDER 20 RULE 18 -- Final decree proceedings -- Value of property to be ascertained -- What date to be considered. Held -- The value of the property has to be ascertained as on the date of the final decree proceedings and it is necessary if the parties so desire to appoint a Commissioner to ascertain market value of the property. Appeal allowed....
Kardicoppal Estate, Rep. by Its Prop. and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-16-2003
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(Kar)68; ILR2003KAR4756; [2004]266ITR20(KAR); [2004]266ITR20(Karn)
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioner in WP No. 13394 & 13635 - 36/2000 is questioning the retrospective amendment to Section 15 of the Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Act (for short the Act) with a further prayer for declaration that the said amendment is prospective in character. Petitioner is also seeking for quashing of assessment orders in terms of Annexures-A, D and E. Petitioner is an assesses in terms of the Agricultural Income Tax Act. Returns were filed by the petitioner. Assessments have been made by the second respondent. The loss determined in the assessment have been allowed to be carried forward in terms of Section 15 of the Act. Section 15 was amended by the Karnataka Taxation Laws (amendment) Act, 1990 retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-1987. Petitioner filed the annual returns for the assessment year 1995-96 claiming total loss of Rs. 11,78,901.92 which includes depreciation amount of Rs. 1,59,146/-. The assessing authority allowed the assessee to carry forward the loss to the...
S.P. Sridhar Vs. Government of Karnataka, Rep. by Its Chief Secretary ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-16-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1521
ORDERN.K. Patil, J. 1. The petitioners who are CL-1 licence holders assailing the legality and validity of the impugned Rules dated 30.6.2003 vide Annexure-G have presented these Writ Petitions. Further, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners fairly submitted that so far as prayers B and C are concerned, those two prayers may be dismissed as having become infructuous in view of the order passed by the Apex Court in (STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. v. K.V. AMARNATH AND ORS. Civil Petition No. 3610/1998 DD 30.8.03). The submissions made by the learned Counsel is placed on record. Prayers (b) &(c) are accordingly dismissed as having become infructuous.2. Now, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners confines these petitions so far as prayer (a) is concerned as stated supra. These petitioners claiming to be CL-1 licencee challenged the constitutional validity of the rules notified in the official gazette dated 30.6.2003 vide Annexures A1 to A6, respectively thereby amending...
Smt. Guduma Vs. Shikandar and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-15-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR3913; 2003(6)KarLJ362
ORDERRajendra Prasad, J .1. This revision petition filed under Section 115 of the C.P.C. by the unsuccessful plaintiff is directed against the order dated 3.3.2003 passed in M.A.No. 9./2002 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Jamakhandi, wherein the learned Civil Judge had allowed the said miscellaneous appeal and thereby vacated the order of temporary injunction granted by the Trial Court (Prl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Jamakhandi) vide order dated 5.7.2002 passed in I.A.No. I in O.S. No. 69/1999, questioning the legality and propriety of the order impugned. 2. The Court has heard the arguments of both sides.3. Sri Jayavittal Rao Kolar, learned Counsel for the revision petitioner, strenuously contended that the material on record clearly shows that the order impugned is illegal and improper and the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) had not appreciated the facts in issue in the right perspective. He also contended that the plaintiff has been in lawful possession of the suit property ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »