Karnataka Court June 2005 Judgments
Shri Gopalakrishna Shetty Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR2993; (2008)13VST328(Karn)
H.L. Dattu, J.1. This Sales Tax Revision Petition is filed against the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in appeal No. 1219/2004 dated 21st day of October, 2004 by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the same.2. A brief reference to the facts may be necessary to resolve the legal issues raised by the petitioner in this revision proceedings. They are:Petitioner is a transporter and owner of vehicle bearing registration No. KA-19 A-3435. On several occasions, in the month of May and June, 2002, he had transported superior kerosene oil and naptha from Mangalore Port or stock points at Mangalore to a place outside the State-Pondicherry/Chennai, consigned by companies like M/s PAS Petro Products, M/s Vivek Petro Chemicals Private Limited, who are registered dealers under the provisions of Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('Act' for short), having their branch office at Mangalore and Head Office at Pondicherry/Chennai, etc., on stock transfer basis. According to the petitioner, th...
Tag this Judgment!R. Chikkarudrappa Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR3288; 2006(3)KarLJ384
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The petitioner was elected as the Councillor of the Town Municipal Council, Vijayapura Town, in the election held on 4-5-2001. The Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Rural District, the first respondent herein, by his order bearing No. MUN(1) CR/108/ 2001-02 dated 30-9-2004, marked as Annexure-K, disqualified the petitioner from being the Councillor of the Town Municipal Council, Vijayapura, on the ground that the petitioner was convicted in C.C.No. 29 of 1977 as Accused No. 7 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of three years, as per the judgment dated 24-7-1978 of the Sessions Court, Bangalore. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the above order of the first respondent, preferred an appeal to the Directorate of Municipal Administration, Government of Karnataka, the second respondent. The second respondent, by his order dated 3-1-2005, marked as Annexure-M, dism...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Belimatha Mahasamsthana Institute of Technology Vs. Visveswaraiah ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)KarLJ623
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioner-Belimatha Mahasamsthana Institute of Technology is before me seeking for a writ of certiorari to quash an order at Annexure-O, dated 19-11-2004 passed by the respondent in addition to a direction to grant affiliation to the petitioner-college for the academic year 2004-05 onwards in the case on hand.2. Facts in brief are as under:Petitioner-college is managed and controlled by Sri Belimatha Mahasamsthana Education Trust. Petitioner-college is an unaided private education institution. The object of the Institution whose aims and objects include creation of institutions for the advancement of knowledge, etc. Petitioner-college is in existence right from 1997-98. Approval was granted to conduct courses in Computer Science and Engineering, Electronic and Communication Engineering, Information, Science and Technology and Medical Electronics by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the Bangalore University from the academic year 1997-98....
Tag this Judgment!The Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Mansoorsaheb
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR4473; 2006(4)KarLJ419
N.K. Patil, J.1. This appeal by the appellant - Special Land Acquisition Officer, UKP, Bilagi is directed against the judgment and award dated 19th January 2002 on the file of the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jamkhandi in LAC No. 1408/2000 on the ground that, the enhancement made by the Reference Court is excessive.3. Land bearing R.S. No. 80/12 measuring 01 acre 12 guntas situate at Badagi village, Bilagi Taluk, has been notified and acquired by the competent authority vide preliminary Notification issued on 25th March 1999 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for the purpose of submergence of backwater of UKP Almatti Reservoir. The Land Acquisition Officer, after taking all relevant factors into consideration and other material available on record, and relying on the sales statistics, has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs. 24,973/- per acre. Being not satisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the respondent - claimant here...
Tag this Judgment!Zahida Begum Vs. Mushtaque Ahamed
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Kant10; I(2006)DMC110; ILR2005KAR4185; 2007(1)KarLJ299
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. The plaintiff is the petitioner. The suit is filed by her for dissolution of marriage with the defendant-respondent which was performed on 22.12.2002 and for consequential relief seeking a direction to the defendant-respondent to return the dehaj articles which were given to the defendant as per the list at the time of marriage. The reason for seeking dissolution of the marriage is that the defendant is impotent and is unable to perform matrimonial obligations. After service of summons, the respondent-defendant entered appearance and has contested the proceedings inter alia denying that he is impotent or he is unable to perform the matrimonial obligations. He would further submit that the marriage was consummated on the date of the marriage itself. In the circumstances, he would seek for dismissal of the suit. A specific averment is made by the defendant-respondent in the written statement that he is willing to undergo medical checkup if directed by the Court....
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gangavva Basavaneppa Sunagar and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2005
Reported in: 2007ACJ1915
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The two appeals arise out of the same accident. In both the cases, respondent No. 1-petitioner and the other employees were being transported from their workplace to their residence in H.G.V. tipper. Accident occurred resulting in injury to the petitioner-respondent No. 1. Petitioners are the employees of respondent No. 2, owner of tipper, but they are not employed in connection with the operation of the insured vehicle. The definition of the workman in relation to motor vehicles under the Workmen 's Compensation Act, 1923,reads thus:(n) 'workman' means any person who is--XXX XXX XXX(ia) (c) a person recruited as driver, helper, mechanic, cleaner or in any other capacity in connection with a motor vehicle.Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads thus:147. Requirements of policies and limits of liabilities.--(1) In order to comply with the requirements of this Chapter, a policy of insurance must be a policy which--(a) is issued by a person who is an author...
Tag this Judgment!Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, Upper Krishna Project Vs. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-23-2005
Reported in: 2006(5)KarLJ418
N.K. Patil, J.1. Though this appeal is listed in orders list, with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for appellant and learned Counsel appearing for respondents, the matter is taken up for final hearing and is disposed of as hereunder having regard to the fact that, the subject-matter involved in the instant case is directly covered by the judgment of this Court in identical matters as submitted by learned Counsel appearing for the parties.2. This appeal by the appellant-Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bilagi is directed against the judgment and award dated 4th January, 2002 on the file of the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jamkhandi in L.A.C. No. 3505 of 1999 on the ground that, the enhancement made by the Reference Court is excessive.3. Land bearing R.S. No. 9/1A/2 measuring 1 acre 22 guntas of Gulabal Village, Bilagi Taluk, along with several lands have been notified and acquired by the Competent Authority vide preliminary notification iss...
Tag this Judgment!R. Sheshadri Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)KarLJ638
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This is a proceeding brought before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, in respect of certain action taken by the revenue authorities purporting to be in exercise of their powers under Section 109 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act').2. Petitioner and the 5th respondent, are at logger heads in respect of certain agricultural land in Sy. Nos. 206/12 and 206/13 with regard to the extent or with regard to the extent which each person possess actually and are before the Civil Court for determination of their inter se rights. In the interregnum it is claimed that the revenue authorities while exercising their powers under Section 109 of the Act had taken some action, which according to the petitioner was without notice to the petitioner and therefore the petitioner thought it fit to challenge that in an appeal before the Joint Director of Land Records. That appeal having been allowed and the matter remanded, wh...
Tag this Judgment!Uttar Pradesh State Bridge Construction Corporation Limited Vs. Bangal ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ARBLR254(Kar); 2005(2)CTLJ451(Kar); 2005(5)KarLJ112
V. Jagannathan, J.1. Legality of the termination of the contract entered into by the Bangalore Development Authority ('BDA' for short) with the Uttar Pradesh State Bridge Construction Corporation Limited ('appellant-Corporation' for short), which has been upheld by the learned Single Judge, is the subject-matter of these two appeals and as the issues involved are in principle identical, the two appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The facts that are material for our purpose are as under:The BDA, which is the first respondent herein, has taken up infrastructure developmental work in Bangalore City and as a part of it, by its notice inviting tender dated 4-11-2002 invited tenders on turnkey basis for construction of Grade Separators/Flyovers at various places viz.:1. The intersection of Airport Road and intermediate ring road junction;2. Bangalore Dairy Circle; and3. Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology Circle.The appellant-construction Corporation, a public undertaking w...
Tag this Judgment!Mungappa and anr. Vs. Special Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-22-2005
Reported in: ILR2005KAR4174; 2006(4)KarLJ114
ORDERShylendra Kumar, J.1. These two writ petitions are by brothers, who had claimed as the legal heirs of one Nagamma, a person belonging to scheduled caste community and in whose favour an extent of 1 acre of land in Sy.No. 155 of Hoodi village K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore had been granted in terms of the sanction order dated 25-6-1952, issued by the Revenue Commissioner in No. D.Dis.C1.DR.177/51-52. The sanction order was one sanctioning the grant of land to an extent of 9 acres 39 guntas in the said survey number to nine persons mentioned in the order, who belong to adi-Karnataka community, i.e, an extent of 1 acre in favour of each person, in accordance with the Rules governing the grant of land to persons belonging to depressed class.2. This sanction order was followed by an individual grant order dated 30-3-1954 in favour of the said Nagamma, granting her one acre of land subject to the condition that the land should not be alienated permanently, as the grant was free of cost, an...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »