Karnataka Court December 2004 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.
Rahiman Sab and ors. Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer, Assistant Commi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: ILR2005KAR854; 2005(2)KarLJ142
K. Ramanna, J.1. Both these appeals are filed by the appellants-claimants under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act against a common judgment and award dated 18.12.1998 passed by the Addl.Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Raichur, in L.A.C.Nos.38 and 39 of 1991, respectively, whereby the reference Court enhanced the market value of the lands from Rs. 3,600/- to Ps.53,800/- per acre with consequential benefits like solatium at 30% on the market value and interest on the enhanced compensation at 9% for the period of one year from the date of taking possession i.e., 22.3.1978 and 15% thereafter till the date of payment. Apart from that reference Court awarded 12% additional value per annum on the market value of the land from the date of possession to the date of the award.2. Assailing the common judgment and award passed by the reference Court , the appellants-claimants herein have come up with the above appeals mainly on the ground that the reference Court has not properly considered the plea...
Mario Pereira and ors. Vs. Deputy Commissioner for Transports and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: ILR2005KAR1178
ORDERS. Abdul Nazeer, J. 1. Petitioners in these cases have called in question the demand of tax made by the Regional Transport Officer, Bangalore and confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Transport, Bangalore in respect of different vehicles.2. The brief of the cases are as follows:3. Petitioners are Registered Owners of All India Tourist Vehicles covered by All India Tourist Vehicle Permits issued under Sub-section (9) of Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 valid throughout the territory of India. The petitioners have claimed exemption from payment of tax by filing Non-use intimation before the 1st respondents in Form No. 30 on the ground that they are parked for repairs outside the State of Karnataka. The 1st respondent has issued endorsements rejecting the said applications stating that in order to claim exemption from payment of taxes as per the Notification No. HTD 170/TMA 2003 dated 06.08.2003 the Registered Owners are required to keep the vehicles in question under non...
Nandakishore Industries Vs. the State of Karnataka, Rep. Through the C ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: ILR2005KAR1246; (2008)11VST701(Karn)
Manjula Chellur, J. 1. The appellant herein is a dealer registered both under Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short referred to as KST and CST Act).2. One M/s. Indumathi Industries had got the financial assistance from Karnataka State Financial Corporation (KSFC). The said unit was carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of fried gram. The appellant herein purchased the said small scale industrial unit (SSI) in a public auction and had been put in possession of the same on 25.11.1992 by K.S.F.C.3. The appellant, while filing the annual returns for the assessment year 1993-94 had claimed exemption from payment of tax under the KST Act and also under the Central Act under a bonafide belief that it is a new industrial unit and therefore, was entitled for the benefit of the notification issued by the State Government bearing No. FD 101 CSI 87(1) dated 7.6.1989. The claim of the appellant was rejected by the assessing authority while concluding th...
Harison and Company Vs. the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxe ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: ILR2005KAR1078; [2006]146STC609(Kar)
H.L. Dattu, J.1. Appellant, a dealer in cotton yarn was a partnership firm and was registered both under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('KST Act' for short) as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ('CST Act' for short). During the period 1.11.1978 to 21.10.1979, the appellant firm was dealing in cotton yarn and according to the appellant firm, it had transferred cotton yarn worth Rs. 89,04,733.05 ps, to its branch office in Ponda-Goa. The appellant firm had filed its annual returns in Forum-4 both under the KST Act as well as CST Act and in so far as its CST turnover is concerned, it had declared that its taxable turnover is 'nil'. The assessing authority had passed an order under the provisions of CST Act, as 'nonassessable'. This order came to be reviewed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Admn.), Belgaum, who was of the view that the order passed by the assessing authority requires to be revised, since the same is improper, illegal and prejudicial to the interest...
The Mysore City Corporation, Rep. by Its Commissioner Vs. D.V. Raghura ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Kant165; ILR2005KAR371; 2005(1)KarLJ523
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 22nd January 2002 in O.S.No. 244/1998 on the file of the III Additional I Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Mysore, holding the preliminary issue regarding maintainability of the suit against the petitioner, has presented the instant civil revision petition.2. The petitioner in this petition is the Mysore City Corporation, represented by its Commissioner, (hereinafter called the 'Corporation'). The respondents herein being aggrieved by the order passed by the assessing authority dated 29th September 1997 enhancing the property tax, as illegal, arbitrary and void and the same is one without jurisdiction and not binding on the respondents, had felt necessitated to file the suit in O.S.No. 244/1998 on the file of the III Additional I Civil Judge, (Junior Division), at Mysore. The petitioner - Corporation in pursuance of the receipt of summons, filed the written statement raising a preliminary objection with regard to m...
Sri Taralabalu Jagadguru Education Society Vs. State of Karnataka and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KarLJ361
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Sri Taralabalu Jagadguru Education Society is seeking for a declaration declaring that respondents have no right to transfer lecturers from colleges run by other managements to any other colleges having Pre-University being run by the petitioner without its consent and as a consequence thereof to quash the order dated 16-11-2000 issued by the first respondent Annexure-C insofar as it relates to 16 lecturers mentioned in Annexure-D who are transferred to various colleges being run by the petitioner in terms of the order.2. Facts as narrated by the petitioner are as under:The petitioner is running several educational institutions catering to the needs of the public. The petitioner states that the aim of the Society is to provide good and meaningful education to the children of rural areas. The petitioner has filed Annexure-A, an order dated 7-8-1972 in the matter of grant-in-aid to Junior Colleges having Pre-University Course. The petitioner has filed Annexure-B, ...
Anand Transport Vs. Karnataka Power Corporation Limited and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Kant183; ILR2005KAR595; 2005(1)KarLJ287
ORDERK.L. Manjunath, J.1. Petitioner is a partnership firm having vast experience in the field of stevedoring shore handling and transport of cargo, stacking, loading, including liaison and having large clientele including State Electricity Board, large steel and cement industries more particularly in ports of Chennai, Tuticorn, Vishakapatnam, Kakinada, Paradeep and Goa. According to the petitioner-firm has come into existence in the year 1972 and having all infrastructure to carry on the said activities. R-1 is a State owned company incorporated under the Companies Act generating electric power for re-distribution and sale.2. As per the notification dated 14-10-2004, R-1 invited tenders for transportation of coal from Mahanadi Coal Fields Limited, Talcher in Orissa to Raichur Thermal Power Station in Karnataka by rail/sea/rail route. Pursuant to the tender notification dated 14-10-2004, a tenderer was required to Submit tender documents in two separate covers, cover-A is known as tech...
In Re: Shivmoni Steel Tubes Employees Association
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: IV(2005)BC310; [2005]126CompCas522(Kar); [2006]65SCL76(Kar)
D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. All these applications/reports are filed during the winding up proceedings of M/s. Shivmoni Steel Tubes Ltd., a company ordered to be wound up in terms of order dated September 8, 1995, passed by this court in Company Petition No. 49 of 1994, pursuant to the recommendation of the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, which recommendation was not disturbed in appeal by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, and the official liquidator attached to the High Court was appointed as liquidator of the company under the provisions of Section 449 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act').2. The winding up proceedings have now reached the stage wherein either the official liquidator or the secured creditors have sold a substantial portion of the assets of the company and the same is realised and the official liquidator had also notified inviting claims from interested persons and the last date for receipt of such claim...
Gadigi Mariswamappa (Deceased by L.Rs.) Vs. Sivamurthy (Deceased by L. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Kant172; 2005(3)KarLJ532
V.G. Sabhahit, J. 1. This appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the Judgment and Decree passed by the Civil Judge, Bellary, in RA No. 55/1980, dt. 11-6-1991 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Principal Munsiff, Bellary in O. S. No. 848/ 1966, dt. 1-8-1980.2. The essential facts of the case leading up to this appeal with reference to the rank of the parties before the trial Court are as follows :--The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the suit schedule property consisted of a private trust of which plaintiff and his heirs are the trustees and for possession of the suit properties from the Court. The schedule property comprises of the Mutt situated within the municipal area of Bellary, Door No. nil, Ward No. VI, lands situated in Bellary comprising of Sy. Nos. 473-B measuring 1 acre 40 cents; 759-A measuring 14.74 cents and lands situated in Siddapuram Village within the sub-registration of Mulakalmuru comprised in Sy. Nos. 429 measuring 1 acre 27 cents; 4...
S. Chandraprakash Vs. Regional Transport Officer
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC232; AIR2005Kant162; ILR2005KAR387; 2005(1)KarLJ639
ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. The petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 29.10.2004 issued by the respondent at Annexure -C. By issuing the said endorsement, the Regional Transport Officer, Bangalore (Central) has imposed fine of Rs. 2,000/- on the petitioner under Section 192(A) of the M.V. Act 1988 ('Act' for short) for violating the condition of permit issued by the respondent.2. On careful perusal of Section 192-A of the Act it is clear that the Court has jurisdiction to impose fine and consequently the Regional Transport officer has no jurisdiction to impose fine. Before imposing fine for the offence Under Section 192-A, the erring permit holder has to be prosecuted in accordance with law in the court of law and only after finding him guilty, the Court may impose fine. Against such conviction and imposition of fine, the appeal lies to the Appellate Court as is clear from Sub-section (3) of Section 192-A of the 'Act'. In view of the above, t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »