Karnataka Court February 2005 Judgments
S.C. Basavarajappa and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR3879; 2005(2)KarLJ456
ORDERK. Sreedhar Rao, J. 1. The petitioners are the employees of the private aided educational institutions. They have submitted request to the respondents to give them the benefit of additional increment for passing Kannada language examination. The representations of the petitioners are yet to be considered and disposed of. 2. The Counsel for the petitioners relied on the ruling of the Supreme Court in K. Krishnamacharyulu and Ors. v. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineering and Anr., : [1997]2SCR368 , wherein it is held that the employees of the private educational institutions are entitled to equal pay on par with the Government employees under Article 39(d) of the Constitution to give effect to the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. The Counsel for the petitioners argued that Annexure-II of the Karnataka Education Rules catalogues benefits which are not admissible to the employees of the aided institutions. Proviso to Section 87 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, dec...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka Golf Association Vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Exemptio ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: (2005)195CTR(Kar)143; [2005]275ITR297(KAR); [2005]275ITR297(Karn)
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This writ petition is in second round before this Court in a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by an assessee under the IT Act, 1961, who is facing the prospect of reopening of assessments of earlier years pursuant to notice issued by the respondent-officers invoking the provisions of Section 147/148 of the IT Act, 1961.2. The petitioner, M/s Karnataka Golf Association, had approached this Court earlier questioning the legality of the notices issued under Section 148, proposing reopening of the assessments 'for the years 1996-97 to 2001-02 as per notices dt. 9th Jan., 2003 by filing Writ Petn. Nos. 8446-8451 of 2003.3. The principal ground of challenge was that the notices by themselves did not disclose as to under what circumstances the reopening was proposed; that the assessee was in the dark as to why proposition notice was issued at all; that the assessee was entitled to seek from the respondents the reasons for such re...
Tag this Judgment!Cradle Runways (India), Rep. by Its Branch Manager Vs. the Commissione ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR1561; [2006]144STC465(Kar)
H.L. Dattu, J.1. The appellant is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as 'KST Act'). The appellant company is engaged in designing manufacture, sale and installation of building maintenance units like cradles, trolleys, portable jibs, winches, etc. The range of building maintenance products designed, manufactured and sold by the appellant company are mainly used for the exterior maintenance of big buildings. One of the products designed and manufactured by the appellant company is 'Facade Access System' which is designed to maintain and clean glass walls, granite and alluminium panels.2. The appellant company has approached the Authority for clarification and Advance Ruling by filing an application in Form 54 as prescribed under Rule 27-E(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules ('Rules' for short), interalia seeking clarification /advance ruling by framing the following questions.'(a) Whether the spe...
Tag this Judgment!State of Karnataka Vs. K.C. Narasegowda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR1822; 2005(3)KarLJ76
ORDEROn a reference by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumkur as to what should be done in respect of the absconding accused 1 in S.C. No. 57 of 1991 when the appeal preferred by the other accused against their conviction has been set aside by this Court, the case is preferred before us.2. It is necessary to note that, in all nine accused were tried in S.C. No. 57 of 1991 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Tumkur for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 324, 326 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. After considering the entire evidence on record, the Trial Court convicted all the accused on all counts and sentenced them accordingly. It is to be noted that after conviction the accused 1-Narasegowda S/o. Channegowda, who was on bail escaped the arrest and suffering of the sentence awarded by the Trial Court. As per the note of the learned Sessions Judge, steps were taken in this regard but accused 1 remained untraced till date....
Tag this Judgment!itc Limited Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Kant330; 2005(4)KarLJ359
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. All these petitions are by persons who have dealings in the notified agricultural produce, as the expression occurs within the meaning of Sub-section (28) of Section 2 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (for short, 'the Act').2. While most of the petitioners are in fact what is known as 'market functionaries', within the meaning of this phrase as it occurs in Sub-section (21) of Section 2 of the Act and are also licensed market functionaries, having sought for and obtained licences to function so within the notified area in respect of the Agricultural Produce Market Committees (APMC), only the petitioner in W.P. No. 39753 of 2004, namely M/s. ITC Limited, is not a licensed market functionary within the market area of the APMC, Doddaballapur, within which area this petitioner has some activities in relation to the notified agricultural produces namely wheat and other produces.3. Petitioners have approached this Court ev...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.M. Gujamgadi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: [2007]290ITR168(KAR); [2007]290ITR168(Karn)
H.N. Nagamohan Das, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, at the instance of the Revenue, has referred the following question of law for our opinion:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the Department could not establish the charge of concealment of income in respect of the unexplained cash credits in the books of the assessee and in that view in cancelling the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c)?2. For the assessment year 1993-94, the assessee filed a return of income on December 23, 1993, declaring an income of Rs. 97,920. This return of income was taken up for scrutiny assessment. The Income-tax Officer found from the books of account of the assessee a sum of Rs. 2,01,000 and a notice was issued to the assessee to explain the same. The assessee submitted his reply stating that he has borrowed the sum of Rs. 2,01,000 from different creditors. Since the assessee failed to secure the creditors, he voluntarily offered to ...
Tag this Judgment!M. Ramakrishnaiah and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR2322; 2005(4)KarLJ229
ORDERSreedhar Rao, J.1. The Petitioners in WP Nos. 522-529/03 are employed as daily wage workers in different APMC's under the jurisdiction of the second Respondent.2. The petitioners in WP Nos. 25058-60/04 and other batch of cases are employed as daily wage workers in different departments coming under the jurisdiction of the Zilla Panchayath.3. The petitioners in WP Nos. 12643-12645/03 are working as daily wage workers under the second Respondent-Khadhi Industries Board in the said writ petitions.4. All the petitioners contend that they are entitled to the relief of regularisation vide the Government Order bearing No. GRAHAPA 75 GPAHA 2001, BANGALORE dated 19.7.02 at Annexure T. This Court in WP Nos. 33541/98 and other batch of cases by the judgment dated 10.9.99 vide Annexure 'D' allowed the writ petition by giving a direction 'to consider the case of regularisation of the petitioners, who are working against the sanctioned post on the condition that they have served for a period of...
Tag this Judgment!Natasha Sondur and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Kant253
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The 1st and 2nd petitioners are minor children of the 3rd petitioner and the 5th respondent. Their marriage took place at Bangalore. The 1st petitioner was born on 19-9-1993 at Stockholm, Sweden and is presently aged about 11 years. The 2nd petitioner was born on 9-2-2001 at Sydney, Australia, and is presently aged about 3 1/2 years. Petitioners and 5th respondent are citizens of Sweden. The 3rd petitioner and 5th respondent were initially living at Stockholm after their marriage in 1989 till June, 1997 when they shifted to Mumbai and New Delhi and thereafter in June, 1999 to Sydney, Australia. Subsequently, the family moved to Stockholm, Sweden, in January, 2002 and once again to Sydney, Australia. Since the beginning of 2003, till December, 2003, they have been residing at Sydney, Australia.2. The 5th respondent with 1st and 2nd petitioners arrived in India on a six months' non-extendable Tourist Visa from Sydney in the 3rd Week of December, 2003 and travelled to ...
Tag this Judgment!Mallikarjun Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Secy. and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR4133; 2006(3)KarLJ134
ORDERK. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The Petitioner was appointed and working as Stenographer under the 2nd Respondent. The third Respondent issued public citation calling for applications for the post of stenographer. The Petitioner applied to the post and was selected in the reserved quota carrying benefit of Rural weightage. The Supreme Court held that rural weightage benefit given under Rule 3(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services General Recruitment Rule 1977 is illegal and unconstitutional. Consequential the Petitioner stood discharged from the service by the order of the third Respondent vide order at Annexure-M dated 12.8.2003.2. The Petitioner claims that by virtue of the provisions in Rule 5 of Karnataka Civil Service Probation Rules, he should be reappointed by the second Respondent in the district judiciary of Karnataka. The provisions of Rule 5 reads thus :'5. Declaration of satisfactory completion of probation etc., (1) At the end of the prescribed or, as the case may be, the reduced ...
Tag this Judgment!R. Paramasivan and anr. Vs. Smt. T. Anasuya
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Kant240; ILR2005KAR1188; 2005(2)KarLJ390
Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J. 1. This Regular first appeal is filed under Section 96 read with Order 41, CPC. This is the appeal filed by the defendants being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the VI Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore in OS 4900/1993 wherein the respondent herein had filed a suit for mandatory injunction. The parties are referred according to their ranking in the court below.2. The plaintiff who is the respondent herein had filed the suit before the lower court seeking for mandatory injunction and also for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from putting up any construction or obstruction on the passage abutting the house of the defendants wherein the defendants have denied easementary right in respect of the passage of 8 ft situate on the south-west corner of the suit schedule property running east-west to the pipeline road.3. The plaintiff is said to have purchased the property from one Byanna in Sy. No. 37/1 of Kempapura Agrahara near Ho...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »