Karnataka Court June 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.
Smt. Gowramma (Since Dead by Lrs. S. Narasinga Rao S/O. Shamanna and o ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: ILR2006KAR2994
ORDERK. Ramanna, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the legal representatives of Smt. Gowramma, seeking writ of certiorari to quash the order passed by the Land Tribunal in LRF.ATC.982/1977-78 conferring occupancy rights in respect of 4 acres 13 guntas of land in survey No. 92 of Singana Agrahara, Sarjapur Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore District, in favour of the third respondent.2. The brief facts leading to this case are that, Smt. Gowramma, the deceased petitioner herein, died on 14.9.1998. During her life time she had executed a registered will wherein the land measuring 4 acres 13 guntas in survey No. 92 of Singana Agrahara, Sarjapur Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore District, has been bequeathed in favour of fourth petitioner herein. Survey No. 92 along with other lands in the said village are the lands assigned as emoluments of the village office of Shanbhogu. Late Ramanna, father-in-law of Smt. Gowramma, was the shanbhogu. He died during the year 1932, and after his death Sri Sha...
Hotel Madhuvan International Private Limited Rep. by Baburay S/O Shiva ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: ILR2006KAR2788; [2006]147STC619(Kar)
Mohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. Since similar questions of fact and law are involved in these writ petitions, they are taken up together for hearing and are disposed of by this common order.2. Heard the learned advocates appearing for petitioners and the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents and perused the material on record.3. For the sake of convenience, I prefer to note the facts of one writ petition.Brief facts of the case in W.P. No. 24575/2005 are as under:The petitioner is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereafter referred to as 'KST Act' for short) and now under Karnataka Value Added Tax Act ('KVAT Act' for short). In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 8-A(1) of the KST Act, the Government of Karnataka by issuing notification produced at Annexure-'B' dated 30th December 1993, exempted with immediate effect the tax under the KST Act in respect of sale of food and drinks by new tourism units situated in the pl...
K.E. Sunil Babu, Asst. Commr. of Income Tax Vs. Steel Processors Banga ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: (2006)206CTR(Kar)615; [2006]286ITR315(KAR); [2006]286ITR315(Karn)
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The account books of A.1 to 3 disclosed a sum of Rs. 100000/- as loan from A.4. Accordingly, the returns were filed by A.1 to 3 for the assessment period 1986-87. The tax authorities conducted search of the premises of A.4 and found that there is no corresponding entries in the accounts of A.4 to corroborate the loan of Rs. 100000/- to A.1 to 3. A.4 was not able to substantiate the source, hence stated to the income tax authority that the entry is a false entry relating to loan from A.4 shown by A.1 to A.3. The income tax accepted the version of A.4. The income tax authorities issued notice to A.1 to 3 for submitting false return. A1 to 3 filed revised returns Under Section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act. The revised return is accepted. Accordingly, the tax liabilities have been recovered. Later on the department launched prosecution of A.1 to 4 for committing offence Under Section 276(c), 277 read with Section 278 of the I.T. Act. The provisions of Section 139(5) r...
Rekha Rajendra, W/O. M.A. Rajendra Vs. the Karnataka State Financial C ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Kant266; I(2007)BC25; [2006]133CompCas105(Kar); ILR2006KAR2773; 2006(5)KarLJ409
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. The petitioner in this petition is questioning the action of the respondents 1 and 2 for taking over the unit in exercise of the powers under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (for short 'the Act') as arbitrary and for quashing of the consequential proceedings which would relate to the sale of the unit or in the alternate direct the first respondent to furnish the details of the outstanding amount so as to enable the petitioner to pay 25% of the amount to avail the benefit of one time settlement policy.2. The matter arises in the following manner.The petitioner sought financial assistance in respect of a project from the first respondent. The project estimate was Rs. 12.90 lakhs. The first respondent sanctioned a loan of Rs. 8 lakhs, out of which a sum of Rs. 4,13,000/- was released. The petitioner was permitted a repayment holiday period of 13 months and 10 days. It is only thereafter the repayment dues with interest, had to commence. A...
Smt. Devamma W/O Rajashekar Vs. State of Karnataka Dept of Home and Di ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KarLJ541
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 16th July 2005 in proceedings No. D.C.G./MAG./289/2005-06 vide Annexure A and also the order dated 8th September 2005 in proceedings No. H.D. 665 SST 2005 vide Annexure C on the file of second and first respondents respectively, has presented the instant writ petition.2. Petitioner herein claims that, her husband, Sri. Rajashekar, has been detained by an order of second respondent dated 16th July 2005 under the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Drug-offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum-Grabbers Act, 1985 ('Act' for short) for a period of three months and sent to Bellary prison. The matter was referred to the Advisory Board under the mandatory provisions of the said Act. The Advisory Board confirmed the detention order passed by second respondent herein and advised imprisonment for a period of twelve months under Section 12 of the said Act...
S. Shashidhara Rao S/O Late N. Subbaiah Vs. M. Vishwanath S/O Late Mun ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KarLJ185
ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J1. The petitioner has filed a petition before the trial court under Section 31(1)(c) read with 37(2)(a) of Karnataka Rent Act of 1999 for eviction of the tenants from the premises bearing No. 271, HMT Employees Co-operative House Building Society Ltd. situated at Mathikere layout, Bangalore-54 in Corporation word No. 3.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased the petition schedule premises under a registered sale deed dated 15.9.1980 from HMT Employees Co-operative House Building Ltd. and he is the absolute owner of the same. Originally the father of the 1st and 2nd respondent and the husband of the 3rd respondent was tenant since 1998 and the rate of rent per month is Rs. 3,250/-. Admittedly the tenancy is month to month commencing from 1st of every calendar month. On the death of original tenant -Muniswamachar, his legal representatives - respondents continued to be in possession of the petition schedule premises. They neither paid the rents nor...
Tiruvengadam @ Tiruvenkatam S/O Lakanadhan Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: ILR2006KAR2739
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The case of the prosecution discloses that on 16.2.05, the accused visited the house of PW 1 robbed cash of Rs. 8000/- and gold jewellary marked at Mos 1 to 11. The accused is a nephew in the sense i.e., brother-in-law of PW 1. The accused at the time of robbery assaulted with iron rod and TV remote caused bloody injuries. After robbery, accused went away by locking the doors from outside, PW 1 informed her husband by telephone about the incident. PW 2-daughter of PW 1 after return from school finds that the door is locked and mother is injured. PW 2 also informs the land lady-PW 8 about the incident, PW 8 come to the scene and console PW 1. PW 1 is admitted to the hospital for treatment. The FIR is lodged on the same day in the night at 10.30 p.m., The accused is arrested. The property robbed is recovered and marked at Mos 1 to 11. PW 1 testifies the above incriminating circumstances. The post event circumstances are testified to by PW 8 and PW 5-the husband of P...
Smt Janaki Bai W/O Late Dharmoji Rao, Vs. Shankarappa S/O Narayan Rao
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)KarLJ469
Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. The plaintiff had filed a suit for injunction against the defendants before the Munsiff at Bhadravathi seeking for a permanent injunction against the defendants who are the appellants herein in respect of property in Sy.No.60 to the extent of 5.11 acres and in Sy.No. 61 to the extent of 5 acres wet land situate in Madishetty Village of Bhadravathi Taluk.2. It is pleaded in the plaint that plaintiff is the owner in possession and cultivating the suit schedule property which is the ancestral property of the plaintiff's father Narayana Rao and after the death of Narayana Rao, the plaintiffs name had been mutated in the RTC and mutation extracts and the plaintiff's property was also attached to the Village Patel's office. After the death of the plaintiffs father, the plaintiff along with his mother filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner for re-grant of the land under Section 5 of the Inams Act. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the application at ...
Nanjunda Swamy H.P., Graduate Engineer Trainee Vs. Union of India (Uoi ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: [2006(111)FLR1167]; (2006)3LLJ363Kant; 2007(2)AIRKarR172
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. Petitioner who has passed Bachelor of Engineering in Polymer Science and Technology claims to have been appointed on August 21, 1995 as a Graduate Engineer Trainee under the 2nd respondent. His services, as asserted by him, were continued from time to time. Petitioner further states that he was made to work as lecturer for Post-Graduate Diploma Courses in Plastic Engineering, Plastic Processing Technology. He was also attending other works like testing assignments, processing, technical service etc. In support of his claim for having rendered service under the second respondent, he has produced certain service certificates and has marked them as Annexure-A series apart from producing the extract of the attendance register as Annexure-B series. His grievance is that though several employees appointed along with him were continued in service his services were sought to be disturbed by discontinuing him which has made him to approach this Court. It is contended by th...
Registrar General High Court of Karnataka Vs. Prakash Jadav S/O Halapp ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-01-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3393
1. The sole accused Prakash Jadav faced a trial before the Trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 392 and 201 of IPC for having committed the murder of a child by name Akhila, with the intention of robbing the ornaments, such as, gold ear rings and silver leg chains, which were worn by the said child and committed robbery by snatching the gold ear rings and silver leg chains, which were worn by the child and that further, after committing the robbery and murder kept the dead body of the child Akhila in a plastic bag, carried it in a suit case, thereafter, by selling away the gold ear rings and silver leg chains at Davanagere, having purchased a gunny bag, put the plastic bag containing the dead body of the child into the gunny bag and with an intention of causing disappearance of the evidence, kept the said gunny bag containing the dead body of the child in a railway compartment at Davanagere Railway Station in the Inter-city Train and has tried to cause the disapp...