Karnataka Court March 2006 Judgments

Sri T. Ravi and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka by Hariharapura Police Sta ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(4)KarLJ15

ORDERA.C. Kabbin, J.1. These revision petitioners were prosecuted in C.C.No. 641/ 2002 in the Court of the J.M.F.C., Koppa, for an offence punishable under Section 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act r/w 379 of the Indian Penal Code. On 29.10.2002, they had been found travelling in a bus bearing No. KA-18/A 4884 belonging to Sahakara Sarige. The prosecution contended that a bag containing sandal wood chips was found in their possession. Alleging that they had cut a sandal wood tree and removed the chips from the forest, they were tried for an offence punishable under Section 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act r/w Section 379 of the I.P.C. After trial, they were convicted by the Learned J.M.F.C. for the said offence and each of them was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default to undergo S.I. for one year. The appeal preferred by them in Crl. A. 123/04 was dismissed by the Learned Sessions Judge on 18-10-2005. Challenging both the judgments, the...

The Government of Karnataka Represented by the Executive Engineer Vs. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(3)ARBLR328(Kar); ILR2006KAR1640; 2006(3)KarLJ360

S. Abdul Nazeer, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a Judgment and Decree passed by the Civil Judge, YadgirinAC. No. 2/1991 dated 11-12-1992 whereby the award passed by the sole arbitrator dated 24-1 -1991 was made rule of the Court.2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:The Government of Karnataka represented by the Executive Engineer I.D., U.K.P NLBC Division No. 4, Kembhavi, Shorapur Taluk, Gulbarga District (hereinafter referred to as 'department') invited tenders for construction of Shahapur branch canal (balance work) in Upper Krishna Project. M/s. Shetty Construction Company Private Limited, No. 13, Adarsha Nagar, Hubli (hereinafter referred to as the 'Claimant') emerged as asuccessful bidder and the claimant was allowed for execution of the work in terms of the agreement dated 14-2-1985. Since certain disputes and differences arose between the parties, the matter was referred to the adjudication of the sole arbitrator appointed as per the provisions contained in Clause 52 of th...

H.S. Srinivasa Vs. Girijamma and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: I(2007)BC92; 2006(4)KarLJ10

ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. The petitioner is the plaintiff. He questions the order dated 29.08.2001 passed by the learned trial Judge on LA. XI in O.S. No. 213/96, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-B.2. During the course of this order, the parties would be referred to as per their rankings in the trial Court.3. The matter arises in the following manner.One Janthakal Rachappa, the husband of defendant-1 and father of defendants 2 to 4 and one H.B. Padmanabha had approached the plaintiff-petitioner for the purpose of constructing and starting a business of bakery. An agreement was executed by late Janthakal Rachappa and H.B. Padmanabha in favour of the plaintiff on 29.9.1993. Under the said agreement late Rachappa had agreed to let out the building proposed to be constructed on a monthly rent of Rs. 7001/-. On the same day, late Rachappa had received an advance amount of Rs. 51,000/- by cash. It is the case of the plaintiff that late Sri Rachappa borrowed a sum of Rs. one lakh each ...

Abdul Gaffar Vs. Income Tax Officer and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR2353; [2006]285ITR203(KAR); [2006]285ITR203(Karn)

Mohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. The petitioner has sought for quashing the order dt. 21st Jan., 2004 passed by the 2nd respondent-CIT, Mysore, vide Annex. 'D', the revised assessment order dt. 27th July, 2004 passed by the 1st respondent-ITO, Mysore, vide Annex. 'E' and the order dt. 8th July, 2.005 passed by the 3rd respondent-Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore, vide Annex. 'K' to the writ petition. He also prayed this Court to declare that the provisions of Section 54F of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), as they stood in the year 2000-01 as ultra vires to the Constitution of India.2. The orders Annexs. D and E have merged into the appellate order vide Annex. K. As against Annex. K, the petitioner has got alternative and efficacious remedy of appeal to the Division Bench of this Court under Sections 260A and 260B of the Act. As the alternative and efficacious remedy is provided to the petitioner for challenging the order Annex. K, I decline to entertain this writ petition insofar ...

Shashi Distilleries Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2007)10VST264(Karn)

ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. The petitioner has sought for a direction in the name of writ of certiorari for striking down the words '(any amount already paid before March 11, 2005 shall not be reckoned for this purpose)', occurring in the Government Order No. FD 91 CSL 2005, dated March 31, 2005. Consequently, the petitioner has also sought for quashing the endorsement dated May 17, 2005 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Assessment-I, Bangalore, vide annexure 'H' to the writ petition.2. Few facts leading to this writ petition are as under:The petitioner was levied with taxes and penalties to the tune of Rs. 2,11,28,670 in the year 1997-98. The said amount of taxes and penalties was paid by the petitioner in instalments between January 12, 1999 and December 4, 2003. Subsequently, the assessing authority demanded a sum of Rs. 60,75,772 towards interest in view of delayed payment of taxes. The said amount of interest payable by the petitioner was paid in instalmen...

Sri. Y.M. Anandvardhana S/O Late Shanmukhaiyya Vs. the Director, Elect ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007(4)KarLJ499; ILR2007(2)Kar1660; 2007(2)KCCR1475; 2007(2)AIRKarR580(DB)

Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The petitioner was a Scientific Officer in the Electronics and Radar Development Establishment. He voluntarily retired from service with effect from 31-10-1994. The Commuted value of pension was paid to him on 24-4-1995. The amount of Gratuity was paid on 24-4-1995. P.P. amount was paid on 7-7-1995. E.L. Encashment was paid on 7-7-1995. After receiving the said amounts, the petitioner sent a legal notice on 20-7-1995 demanding interest at 18% on the amounts paid belatedly. The respondents vide letter dated 25-9-1995 informed the petitioner that there was no delay or inaction on their part and that the amounts were paid within time as per O.M. No 7/20/89-P & PW(F) dated 22-1-1991 and hence he was not entitled to any interest. Thereupon the petitioner filed an application before Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Bangalore claiming interest on delayed payment. The said application was numbered as CGA 2/1998. But it was dismissed by the Tribunal...

D. Narayanappa Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J. 1. Writ petition by a person who is presently working as a 'watermen' in the respondent 4-Honnudike Grama Panchayat, Gulur Hobli, Tumkur Taluk and District who is basically aggrieved by the appointment of respondent 5 to the post of 'bill collector' in terms of as many as three resolutions passed by the fourth respondent-Honnudike Grama Panchayat. 2. The Panchayat in its meeting held on 4-7-2003 and as recorded on 21-7-2003 (copy at Annexure-R1) had resolved to appoint the fifth respondent as a bill collector at its office, as an incumbent in the office had retired. The Panchayat had for such purpose invited applications from eligible persons by putting up a notification in this regard on its notice board. 3. The petitioner, fifth respondent, who was a former member of the very Panchayat and 10 others, it appears, had applied and amongst them, the fifth respondent was selected and appointed in terms of the resolution dated 4-7-2003. 4. The petitioner being...

N. Bhagyalakshmamma Vs. Smt. Subbulakshmamma and ors.

Court: Karnataka

ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. The petitioner herein filed this writ petition challenging Annexure-L, dated 29-4-2000 passed by the 9th respondent in Case No. RA 205/96-97, Annexure-R, dated 24-8-2002 passed by the 10th respondent in Case No. RA 37/2000-01 and to restore the mutation Entry M.R. No. 5/95-96, Annexure-E in favour of the petitioner.2. The case of the petitioner is that late C.S. Narayana Rao, the husband of the deceased 1st respondent-Subbulakshmamma and father of respondents 2 to 4 being the Barabardar (Baravadhar) of Varamallenahalli Village pursuant to appointment order dated 7-5-1925 was in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the inam land bearing Sy. No. 1 measuring 6 acres 37 guntas of Varamallenahalli Village, Chickballapur Taluk. After coming into force of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961, late C.S. Narayana Rao made an application for grant of the said land in his favour. Accordingly, the said land was regranted in his favour by the Tahsildar, Chickball...

D.A. Upadhya Vs. the Vice-chancellor, Kannada University and ors.

Court: Karnataka

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. In the instant case, petitioner has sought to declare the action on the. part of respondents in demanding double fees to the course called 'Master of Visual Arts' as per communication dated 23rd February, 2006 vide Annexure-Q issued by third respondent as illegal and void and to issue a direction, directing the respondents, restricting them from demanding double fees from the petitioner and permit him to complete the course by paying single fee on par with others by considering the representing made by the petitioner vide Annexure-S, dated 28th February, 2006. Further, he has sought for a direction, directing the respondents to adjust the additional amount towards payment of admission fees and examination fees for the 4th semester in respect of Master of Visual Arts course and to refund the balance amount along with interest to the petitioner.2. It is not in dispute that, petitioner has taken admission in the respondents-Kannada University (University' for short) ...

Mary Kutty Vs. the Hindusthan Times and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2006(110)FLR977]; ILR2006KAR1772; 2007(3)KarLJ294

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. The Petitioner was appointed by the respondent as a Telex Printer Operator on a salary of Rs. 600/-, as on 10.10.1984. She was designated as a part time Telex Printer Operator at Bangalore, though she was doing full time work of typing, telephone, operator, Clerical and cutting and filing of news paper work. She continued to discharge her duties and the respondent management had changed her designation as a trainee-Clerk with additional responsibilities. This was a ruse adopted by the management in order to circumvent the legal provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The said workman even after change of designation was continued to be treated as a trainee and the period of appointment as a trainee was extended from time to time. The last of such extension was by a letter dated 12.1.1990 as at Ex.M.5, extending the training period from 2.1.1990 to 31.5.1990. By a letter Ex.M.8, the petitioner was informed that if she does not improve her performance ...