Karnataka Court November 2006 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.
Workmen of Bata India Limited, Represented by Its General Secretary, B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: ILR2007KAR615; 2007(1)KCCR77; 2007(1)AIRKarR616
ORDERH.N. Nagamohan Das, J.1. In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 31.1.2002 passed by the 1st respondent-Labour Commissioner rejecting the claim of the petitioners under Section 33-C(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the 'Act').2. The 2nd respondent is a registered Company engaged in the manufacture of leather goods. The petitioner is an employees Association representing the workmen in the 2nd respondent-Company. The service conditions of 2nd respondent and its workers are governed by a settlement dated 11.3.1998. The 2nd respondent deducted the wages of certain employees on pro-rata basis on the ground that they indulged in go-slow for the period from February 2001 to July 2001. Aggrieved by this pro-rata deduction, the petitioners approached the 1st respondent under Section 33-C(1) of the Act. The 1st respondent passed the impugned order on 31.1.2002 rejecting the claim of the petitioners as n...
M. Pakkeerappa Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: ILR2007KAR23; 2007(1)KarLJ681; 2007(1)KCCR270; 2007(3)AIRKarR96(DB)
Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. This Writ Appeal is against the judgment dated 17.4.2006 in Writ Petition No. 38932/2002. The appellant is the petitioner in the Writ Petition.2. The appellant is an Assistant Teacher in Sri Siddavrushubendra Pre-University College, Jada, in Sorab Taluk in Shimoga District (4th respondent herein). He filed the Writ Petition praying for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 16.5.2002 (Annexure-'B') and to give him promotion to the post of Lecturer in Political Science with retrospective effect from 16.5.2002 and to grant all consequential benefits including arrears of salary. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the 5th respondent was appointed as Lecturer in Political Science in the 4th respondent College and the approval was granted to the said appointment by the Director of Pre-University Education as per Annexure-'L' order dated 3.6.2003. Thereupon the petitioner amended the Writ Petition to include a prayer for quashing Annex...
Sri K. Divakar S/O Late C. Kuntaiah, First Division Accounts Assistant ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)KarLJ360; 2007(1)KCCR388; 2007(1)AIRKarR323
ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. The facts of the case are:It is the petitioner's case that he was appointed as a Typist in Grade II by the first respondent namely, the Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority, on 7.11.1974. There was a change in his cadre on his promotion to the cadre of Second Division Assistant with effect from 7.4.1987. The petitioner states that by an Official Memorandum dated 2.12.1991, he was promoted to the cadre of First Division Assistant on seniority-cum-merit basis against an existing vacancy. He was placed at Serial No. 3 in the seniority list. On the other hand, the petitioner contends that the second respondent had joined the first respondent as a peon on 2.3.1977 and was promoted as Second Division Assistant on 30.6.1982 and thereafter promoted as a First Division Assistant along with the petitioner under the Official Memorandum dated 2.12.1991 and he was placed at Serial No. 10 in the seniority list. There was an officiating period of one year in the ca...
Shivakumar S/O Kalyanappa Padashetty Vs. the Disciplinary Authority an ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: ILR2007KAR427; 2007(3)KarLJ271; 2007(1)KCCRSN18; 2007(1)AIRKarR429
ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. The facts of the case are:The petitioner was working as a Peon-cum-watchman in the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yadgiri from the year 2003. It transpires that on 10.12.2003 at about 2 A.M., there was theft in the court premises when the petitioner was not at his post, since he had unauthorisedly gone home. When he returned to his post, he found that the locks had been broken at the court premises and he had informed his superiors and a criminal case was registered. In this regard, the petitioner was served with a charge memo and an enquiry was conducted. It was found that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct and ultimately was removed from service. It is in this background that the petitioner is before this Court. 2. The counsel for the petitioner would submit, that it is not denied that the petitioner was absent at the time that the theft had occurred. The petitioner, after having seen off the Civil Judge at the bus stand at midnight on 9.1...
Employees State Insurance Corporation Represented by Its Deputy Direct ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: [2007]136CompCas744(Kar); [2007(114)FLR519]; 2007(3)KarLJ198; (2007)IIILLJ142Kant
V. Jagannathan, J.1. The question that is involved in this appeal is whether 'Manipal Sowbhagya Nidhi Ltd.', a public limited company under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, is a 'shop' coming within the purview of Section 1(4) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 ('the Act' for short), or under any notification issued under Section 1(5) of the Act, including the Government notification dated 9.1.1987.2. The E.S.I. Court answered the said question in the negative giving rise to this appeal by the E.S.I. Corporation.3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.4. The learned Counsel for the appellant-Corporation submitted that the respondent-company comes within the expression 'shop' and, as such, the provisions of the Act become applicable by virtue of Section 1(5) of the Act. It is contended that the E.S.I. Court failed to property appreciate the law bearing on the point with regard to the meaning of the word 'shop' as well as with regard to the scope of the Act....
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Spences Hotel Pvt. Ltd. Repr. by ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: [2007]289ITR145(KAR); ILR2007(1)Kar516; 2007(2)KCCRSN77(DB)
1. This appeal is filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax against the order dated 4-6-2003 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.Nos. 9193-9194/2000 allowing the writ petitions. The notice dated 17-11-1998 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for assessing the escaped tax of the respondent is quashed with a direction not to proceed further in the matter.2. The issue involved in the case pertains to income tax liability arising out of an agreement between respondent and another. The dispute between them was resolved through arbitration. The amount payable to the respondent herein in terms of the award was sought to be taxed towards capital gains in the assessment year 1980-81. The matter reached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal noticed that amount sought to be assessed was offered to tax for the assessment year 1976-77 and it was within the knowledge of the assessing officer while concluding the assessment during...
Manjunatha S/O Lingappa Vs. P. Shankar, Major S/O Puttalingegowda and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: ILR2007(1)Kar914; 2007(2)KLJ201; 2007(1)KCCR807; 2007(2)AIRKarR318; AIR2007NOC950; 2007(3)CivilLJ857.
N. Kumar, J.1. This is a claimant's appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the injury sustained in a motor accident. When the claimant was standing in Kunigal bus-stand, a bus bearing Regn.No. KA-06-8114 driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver dashed against him on account of which he sustained fracture of left ankle joint and other minor injuries. Immediately he was shifted to Kunigal Primary Health Centre. It is his case that he took further treatment in a private hospital and has spent Rs. 30,000-00 towards medical expenses and other incidental charges. He is aged 35 years and working as a driver. He was earning Rs. 3,000-00 per month. After the accident, he could not do his job and even he was not able to move. As such, he has become destitute in life.Therefore, he sought for compensation in a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs for the injury sustained in the said accident.2. To the said claim petition he has made the owner of the lorry and the insurance company which had insur...
Divisional Manager Vs. Smt. Chanda Bi, Mother of Late Babu Jan and ors ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ592
V. Jagannathan, J.1. The Divisional Manager, Southern Railway, Mysore, the appellant herein, has questioned the legality of the order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Mangalore, fixing the liability on the appellant to pay the compensation awarded to R-1 to R-4.2. The facts in brief are to the effect that R-1 to R-4 herein filed a claim petition before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Mangalore, praying for compensation following the death of one Babujan, who, according to the claimants, was working in the canteen run by R-5 in the premises of Kabaka-Puttur Railway Station. It was the case of the claimants that Babujan died following the stove explosion in the canteen on 20.4. 1990 and, therefore, contending that the deceased was working in the railway station canteen for over five years prior to his death, the claim petition was preferred. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, after taking into consideration the evidence let in by the parties, ...
Sri Umesh N. Divagi and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Secreta ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)KarLJ140; ILR2007(1)Kar524; 2007(2)KCCRSN54; 2007(2)AIRKarR356
V.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Uttara Kannada, Karwar, dated: 9-1-2006 wherein the Deputy Commissioner has dismissed the revision and confirmed the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner.2. It is the contention of the petitioners that the petitioners are the owners of the Land comprised in Sy.No. 190/1 measuring 3 acres 14 guntas and 190/4 measuring 4 acres 5 guntas of Divagi Village, Kumta taluk, Uttara Kannada District. The lands belong to the petitioner's predecessors who were cultivating the said lands from time immemorial. However, the Assistant Commissioner by his order dated 26/8/1951 taken over the possession of the lands under the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 on the ground that the lands were fallow and gave the lands to one Sinjanv Simanv Fernandes on lease for a period of 10 years and the ownership of the lands remained with the owners of the land i.e. th...
State of Karnataka by Its Commissioner for Commercial Taxes and the De ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: (2007)8VST198(Karn)
ORDER1. M/s Mangalore Steel and Cements are before us in STRP No. 53 of 2005. Following questions of law are raised in this petition.1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the petitioner's case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in fixing the penalty at one time the tax payable when no evidence existed to prove that the petitioner had knowingly produced a false declaration?2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the petitioner's case the Appellate Tribunal was justified in disturbing the finding of the first Appellate Authority that no evidence was available on record to levy penalty when no new circumstances were placed on record before the Appellate Tribunal?3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the petitioner's case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in imposing penalty in the absence of the relevant evidences?4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the petitioner's case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in law in not setting aside the entire penalty when ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »