Karnataka Court August 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.
Omni Forge Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-23-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR4260; (2008)11VST125(Karn)
ORDERH.L. Dattu, J.1. Since common questions of facts and law are involved in these two revision petitions, they are heard together and disposed off by this common order.2. The assessee is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The assessee is also a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act ('KST Act' for short) as well as the Central Sales Tax Act ('CST Act' for short).3. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of forgings with specialisation in forging jointiess rings, ring gears, flanges of sizes up-to 750 mm outer diameter. According to the petitioner, the activity that is carried on by it, is the purchase of mild steel ingots and mild steel billets and then to pound them by hammers under great pressure to form high strength parts known as forgings. It is stated by the petitioner that the metal used for forgings is never melted and poured and there is also no foundry process involved in the manufactu...
Chev. K.M. Joseph Vs. St. Mary's Jacobite Syrian and Ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Kant474; ILR2004KAR4707
Chidananda Ullal, J. 1. Heard Miss. Irfana, the counsel for the appellant, on admission. It is her case that the Court below had entered into an error in passing the impugned order.2. Having gone through the impugned order, I do not want to contribute to that, for the language in Order 39 Rule 2A of CPC is clear, the same reads as hereunder:'2A. Consequence of disobedience, or breach of injunction -(1) In the case of disobedience of any injunction granted or other order made under Rule 1 or Rule 2 or breach of any of the terms on which the injunction was granted or the order made, the Court granting the injunction or making the order, or any Court to which the suit or proceeding is transferred, may order the property of the person guilty of such disobedience or breach to be attached, as may also order such person to be detained in the civil prison for a term not exceeding three months, unless in the meantime the Court directs his release.'Admittedly the injunction was granted by this C...
Poovappa Bangera and ors. Vs. the Land Tribunal and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR4786; 2004(7)KarLJ438
ORDERS. Abdul Nazeer, J. 1. The petitioners have called in question the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Belthangady, in No. LRY/15/74-75 dated 14.1.2004 (Annexure-A) whereby the Land Tribunal rejected the application filed by the father of the petitioners seeking grant of occupancy right in respect of the land in question.2. It is the case of the petitioners that their father late Babu Poojari had taken the schedule lands on lease from the mother of the respondents No. 8 and 9 for cultivation and on the basis of the said lease, he was cultivating the lands as on 1.3.1974. After his death, the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the said land. It is contended that respondents No. 2 to 7 were the original owners of the schedule lands. They had mortgaged the lands in favour Smt. Anthamma the mother of respondents No. 8 and 9. Smt. Anthamma had given the schedule lands on lease in favour of Babu Poojari, the father of the petitioners. Babu Poojari filed application in Form No...
M. Cheluviah Vs. Smt. Amruthamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4564
ORDERMohan Santhanagoudar, J. 1. By the impugned order , the Sessions Court has set aside the order passed by the learned Magistrate of issuing process against the respondent herein.2. The records disclose that the petitioner herein lodged the complaint inter alia contending that he agreed to purchase six items of the properties from the respondent for Rs. 12,50,000/-. The respondent has already sold five items of the properties, except Item No. 3 shown in the schedule annexed to the complaint. The complaint also discloses that an amount of Rs. 1,13,000/- is due by him to be paid to the respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that, as the respondent has refused to sell the aforesaid property to the petitioner as agreed to between the parties, she has committed the offence of criminal breach of trust and cheating etc.. Based on these allegations, the complaint was lodged by the petitioner before the Magistrate's Court, Malavalli in P.C.R. No. 42/ 2002 praying the said Court to p...
Kunal Steel Corporation Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-20-2004
Reported in: [2006]146STC545(Kar)
ORDERMohan Shanthanagoudar, J.1. Heard Sri S.G. Shivaram, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri G. Bhavani Singh, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.2. By the impugned order, the court below has issued fine levy warrant against the petitioner Under Section 421(l)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for recovery of the amount of tax allegedly due by him.3. The records disclose that the respondent herein filed an application Under Section 13(3)(b) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter called as 'the Act' for short) for recovery of Rs. 7,338, the alleged tax due by the petitioner to the department. The respondent based his claim merely on the notice issued to the petitioner herein Under Section 12-B(2) of the Act. The grievance of the petitioner is that no order is passed by the department pursuant to the notice Under Section 12-B(2) of the Act and consequently, these proceedings cannot be initiated for the p...
Karnataka State Financial Corporation, by Its Dgm Vs. Span Projects Pv ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR4366; [2005]57SCL351(Kar)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Company Application in C.A. 1352/2002 is by M/s Karnataka State Financial Corporation (in short the -'Corporation'), who claims to be a secured creditor of M/s Span Projects (P) Ltd., a company under liquidation and which had been ordered to be wound up by this Court in terms of the order dated 3.10.2002.2. The aforesaid application is filed under the provisions of Section 446(1) read with Section 537(1) of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 (in short the 'Act') praying for permission to take over the assets of the company under liquidation by the Applicant-KSFC in exercise of their statutory powers under Section 29 of the State Finance Corporations Act (in short the 'SFC Act') as also to take into their fold some of the assets of the company which are with M/s Elegant Rocks (P) Ltd., 2nd respondent to this application, who, it appears, had instituted a suit against the company under liquidation for recovery of certain amount in O.S. 15579/2000 before the Ci...
K. Srinivasa Vs. Karnataka Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR4524; 2004(7)KarLJ433
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. This petition is filed by one Srinivasa seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Annexure-F an endorsement dated 6.6.1998 in the matter of prescribing minimum marks for physical endurance test. Petitioner further prays to quash appointment order dated 6.3.1998 at Annexure-J issued to the fourth respondent and the order dated 8.12.1998 at Annexure-H issued to the third respondent. Petitioner also wants a direction to consider his case in the matter.2. Petitioner belongs to Meda community which is classified as Schedule Tribe in terms of Annexure-A. He passed 7th standard examination obtaining 428 marks out of 600 marks. He worked in the Electricity Board for four months. First respondent wanted to fill up Probationary Mazdoor in terms Annexure-D. Selection is governed by the Board's Regulations. Procedure-for appointment is prescribed in terms of Regulation 8 of the Regulations. Petitioner states that the respondents are required to provide weight age marks in terms...
Enercon (India) Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka Rep. by the Commissioner o ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR4020
ORDERDattu, J. 1. The petitioner is a limited company and is registered as non-resident dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act ('KST Act' for short) and Central Sales Tax Act ('CST Act' for short). The petitioner company is engaged in the activity of execution of works contract of supply, erection and commissioning of wind mills for power generation. During the assessment year 1997-1998, the petitioner company had supplied, erected and commissioned wind mills at Medakaripura Village, Chitradurga District, for M/s. Jindal Aluminium Limited, Bangalore, as per the agreement entered into between them on 12th day of June, 1997 and 11th day of July,1997.2. The petitioner company had filed its annual returns for the assessment year 1997-1998 showing the gross receipts of Rs. 19,67,50,000.00 and claimed exemption for payment of tax under the Act on its entire turnover on the ground that the sales of wind mills and contract receipts relating to wind mills are exempt under en...
Nooli Channayya Smaraka Vs. State of Karnataka, by Its Secretary, Educ ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR4133; 2004(6)KarLJ132
ORDERAbdul Nazeer, J. 1. Petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act vide Registration No. 121/1992-93 dated 09.10.1992. It is contended that the Society is managed by the persons belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe and that it has all the infrastructure such as School building on a rental basis, play ground, Library and well equipped Laboratory for running the Higher Secondary School. It made an application to the respondents for grant of recognition to start Higher Secondary School in the name and style of 'Sri Bannimahankali Higher Secondary School' at Nargund Town in Gadag District. The 4th respondent forwarded the proposal to the State Government and the State Government by its order dated 25.09.1993 accorded recognition for opening Higher Secondary School at Nargund Town in Gadag District. The petitioner was conducting the course for the last ten years, without there being any grant from the State Government.2. It is further contended that...
Nri Film Production Associates (P) Ltd. Vs. Twentieth Century Fox Film ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR4530
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The case is at the stage of admission. At the request and with the consent of both the parties, the appeal heard on merits for final disposal.The appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for a declaration that the Movie Independence Day (I.D.) produced by the defendants is the infringement of the copyright of the film script Extra Terrestrial Mission (E.T.M.). Further seek an injunction against display of the film in any theatre or through a videocassette etc. both in India and world over. Further seek an enquiry into accounts of the film I.D. for assessing the compensation payable to the plaintiff for the tort of infringement.2. The Managing Director of the Plaintiff Company claims to be the author of the film script E.T.M., acquired registered copyright in the year 1986. The plaintiff in the year 1993 had engaged Ms. Susan Schaefer, an Entertainment Attorney at U.S. for getting a financial investor as a co-producer for the film ETM. One Mr. Richard Garzilli a profession...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »