Karnataka Court March 2004 Judgments
Khalid Saleem Vs. Manjaiah and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)KarLJ558
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This writ petition is by a person who had purchased a part of a land granted in favour of a person belonging to depressed class as per a Grant Order dated 15-11-1951. The petitioner had purchased part of this land namely four acres out of the five acres that had been granted as per a sale deed executed by the grantee on 27-7-1971. The effect of the provisions of the Land Revenue Code, the conditions of Grant and the resultant effect on the sale in the light of the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 ('the Act' for short) was the subject-matter of proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner, the authorities functioning under the Act for the purpose of identifying of such lands which had been sold in violation of the terms of the grant which attracted the provisions of this Act and for resumption of the land in favour of the State and further re...
Tag this Judgment!Mmt (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: [2004]137STC257(Kar)
1. Sri B. Anand, learned Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondent.2. This is an appeal under Section 24-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the Act' for short) filed against the clarification/ advance ruling order dated December 22, 2003 in case No. CLR.CR. 106/03-04 passed by the Authority for Clarification and Advance Ruling constituted under Section 4 of the Act.3. The appellant is a registered dealer under the Act engaged in the business of digital printing. The appellant filed an application seeking advance ruling in regard to exigibility of digital printing to sales tax. The appellant submitted that process of digital printing is a skilled job of printing which does not involve any transfer of property in goods as a consequence of any contract of sales; that the customers provide the art works and designs in the form of computer files stored in floppy/compact discs; and that the assessee uses such art works and designs to produce full size pictures a...
Tag this Judgment!Globe Congeneration Power Limited Vs. Sri Hiranyakeshi Sahakari Sakker ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Kant94; 2005(1)ARBLR502(Kar); ILR2004KAR2045; 2004(7)KarLJ124
S.R. Nayak, J.1. This appeal preferred under Section 37(1)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for short, 'the Act' by the Globe Co-generation Power Limited, Mumbai which is a public limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Company's Act, 1956 and having its registered office at 201, T.V. Industrial Estate, Worli, Mumbai-400 025, is directed against the order dated 25.08.2003 in Arbitration Application No. 40 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the VI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, (for short, Bangalore Court) dismissing the application filed by the appellant herein under Section 9 of the Act on the ground that it has no jurisdiction to grant the relief sought in AA No. 40 of 2003.2. The case of the appellant is as follows:(i) The appellant is engaged in developing, designing implementing and operating Cogeneration Power Projects. Sri Hiranyakeshi Sahakari Karkhane Niyamit, Sankeshwar Taluka, Hukkeri, Belgaum District, which is registered under th...
Tag this Judgment!B. Dhanraj Vs. Central Bank of India and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Kant416
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The appeal filed against the judgment and decree passed in O. S. No. 163/97 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Davanagere. The appellant is the defendant and had availed credit card facility from the respondent/bank (hereinafter called plaintiff). On the credit card borrowings the defendant is due in a sum of Rs. 1,33,000/-. The plaintiff bank filed a suit for recovery of the dues with service charges at the rate of 2.5% p.m. on the principal claim from the date of the suit till payment with costs.2. The availment of credit card facility is admitted. In the present appeal the rate of interest granted at 12% p.a. is challenged.3. It is the contention of the appellant there is no stipulation to pay interest. The stipulation enabling the bank to collect service charges at the rate of 2.5% p.m. does not amount to a contract to pay interest. Therefore, grant of interest is bad in law.4. After going through the documentary evidence at Ex. P1., the application submitt...
Tag this Judgment!Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. Principal Secretary, Dept. of Industries an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-16-2004
Reported in: (2008)11VST795(Karn)
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioner is seeking for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated May 2, 2002 passed by the State Level Committee annexure K. I.A. II was filed seeking for amendment of the prayer. The same was allowed. In terms of the amendment, petitioner is now challenging only annexure Q dated November 14, 2003.2. Facts in brief are as under:Petitioner is a limited company. Petitioner is a registered dealer under Section 12-E of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short 'the K.S.T. Act'). Petitioner has put up a cement unit at Penambur, Mangalore. Petitioner manufactures cement at its various plants located in the States of Maharashtra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa. The cement unit at Mangalore has several basic features. Details of the system established at Mangalore is enumerated in the project report filed at annexure A. The State Government issued a notification dated March 15, 1996 read with notification June 15, 1996 as per annex...
Tag this Judgment!Nagawwa Vs. Mallappa
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1594; 2004(3)KarLJ1
ORDERN.K. Jain, C.J.1. The defendant-petitioner has filed this petition against the order dated 5-4-2003 passed on I.A. No. 18 in O.S. No. 94 of 1997. The defendant-petitioner had disputed the signature of her husband on the Will and as such she had moved I.A. No. 18 under Order 26, Rule 10-A of the Civil Procedure Code seeking to appoint a Handwriting expert to give opinion about the signature of her husband. The Trial Court rejected the same.2. The learned Single Judge while considering the revision petition found that the decision of this Court in Smt. Meenakshamma v. Munivenkatappa 2004(1) Kar. L.J. 267 : ILR 2003 Kar. 2758 and the decision of the Apex Court in Shiv Shakti Co-operative Housing Society, Nagpur v. Swaraj Developers and Ors., : [2003]3SCR762 had expressed different views, and therefore, referred the matter to a Division Bench on the question of maintainability of the revision petition against the interlocutory orders and as to whether, in view of the amendment of Sect...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mcdowell and Co. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2004
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(Kar)518; [2004]269ITR451(KAR); [2004]269ITR451(Karn)
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. This appeal under Section 27A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, ('Act' for short) is filed against the order dt. 28th April, 2003 in Misc. Petn. No. 204/Bang/2002 arising out of the order dt. 27th Aug., 2002, in WTA No. 23/Bang/1999 relating to asst. yr. 1993-94.2. The Asstt. CWT, Central Circle-II, Bangalore, passed an order dt. 30th Sept., 1996, under Section 18(1)(c) r/w Section 18(2) and 18(3) of the Act levying a penalty of Rs. 5,13,296 being 200 per cent of the amount of wealth-tax said to have been evaded by the assessee-respondent. The appeal filed by the assessee against the imposition of such penalty was dismissed by the CWT(A)-I, Bangalore, by order dt. 18th Feb., 1999 in Appeal No. WTA. 25/C.II/CIT(A)-I/96-97. The further appeal filed by the assessee in WTA. No. 23/Bang/99 was partly allowed by the Tribunal by order dt. 27th Aug., 2002, reducing the penalty to the minimum leviable under the Act which is equal to the amount of tax sought to be evaded.3. Ther...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Nithen Kumar Sheth
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)KarLJ216
Tirath S. Thakur, J.1. This appeal arises out of an order dated 26-7-1999 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court whereby Writ Petition No. 19379 of 1996 filed by the petitioner-respondent herein was allowed and the demand raised by the appellant-Board for payment of service charge of Rs. 7,500/- per Kilo Watt reduced to Rs. 2,500/- per Kilo Watt. 2. The respondent appears to have purchased property bearing No. 14, 11th cross Nehrunagar, Bangalore, and after demolishing the existing structure built a multi-storied residential complex in the same. A request was then made to the appellant-Karnataka Electricity Board for supply of electric power. Different applications in that regard appear to have been made from time to time in which the estimated load for the building varied between 47 Kilo Watts and 20.20 Kilo Watts. In response to the said requests the Board issued an endorsement dated 19th of June, 1996 informing the respondent that the 'Specified Load' for the building in que...
Tag this Judgment!Boby Mathew Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3003; 2004(5)KarLJ415
S.R. Bannurmath, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 21st of August, 2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bangalore, in Session Case No. 281/1995 finding the accused/appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302, I.P.C., and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 5000/- carrying default sentence, the present appeal is filed.2. The brief facts, giving rise to the present incident as projected by the prosecution, are as follows :--The deceased-Dr. Ravish, his wife Dr. Nivedita P.W. 7 and son Sushrutha P.W. 9 were residents of Banashankari area in Bangalore. Both husband and wife were medical practitioners having their separate attendance in different hospitals. Apart from being a medical practitioner, the deceased was also interested in photography, computer graphics, music and painting. According to the prosecution out of these few hobbies, photography was his passion. This passion of photography by the deceased was s...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Mcdowell and Co. Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-15-2004
Reported in: [2004]136TAXMAN716(Kar)
R.V. Raveendran, J.This appeal under section 27A of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as Act), is filed against the order dated 28-4-2003 in Miscellaneous Petition No. 204/Bang./2002 arising out of the order dated 27-8-2002 in WTA No. 23/Bang./99 relating to assessment year 1993-94.2. The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Central Circle-11, Bangalore, passed an order dated 30-9-1996 under section 18(1)(c) read with sections 18(2) and 18(3) of the Act levying a penalty of Rs. 5,13,296 being 200 per cent of the amount of wealth tax said to have been evaded by the assessee-respondent. The appeal filed by the assessee against the imposition of such penalty was dismissed by the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals)-I, Bangalore, by order dated 18-2-1999 in appeal No. WTA.25/C.II/Commissioner (Appeals)-I/96-97. The further appeal filed by the assessee in WTA. No.23/Bang/99 was partly allowed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal by order dated 27-8-2002 reducing the penalty...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »