Karnataka Court June 2006 Judgments

Mac Explotec (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2006)203CTR(Kar)409; [2006]286ITR378(KAR); [2006]286ITR378(Karn)

ORDER1. By this order, two references in ITRC 420/1998 and 421/1998 are disposed of by a common order. The assessee-Company is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of providing technical know-how towards manufacture of industrial explosives and also in certain allied manufacturing operations. The Company belongs to Mr. Machado family comprising of N.J. Machado and his wife Mrs. W.S.P. Machado. They were the Directors of the Company. The Company sent T.J. Machado, son of the above mentioned lady Director to a foreign country for getting education and bore the entire expenses of Rs. 2,04,807/- relating to such foreign education in the assessment year 1989-90, The assessing officer disallowed the claim of the assessee towards expenses under consideration on the ground that the expenses did not relate directly to the income earned and that the connection of the entire expenditure with the company depended on the probability of return of T.J. Machado and to continue with the co...

C. Ramaiah S/O Late Channigappa, Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Com ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(6)KarLJ233

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dated 30/08/2000 in Appeal No. 122/1999 as per Annexure 'E' and the order passed by the Director of Survey Settlement and Land Records in Karnataka, dated 30/11/1998 in Appeal No. 37/1996-1997 as per Annexure 'D' wherein an order has been passed to delete the names of Bylappa, son of Byranna and Channigappa, son of Dodda Channarayappa from the second re-classification prathi book dated 13/02/1960 in respect of Sy.No. 51 of Kuntanahalli Village.2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the sons of Channigappa. The land measuring 11 acres 27 guntas in Sy.No. 51 of Kuntanahalli Village, belongs to Sri. Byranna, son of Sri. Giddappa of Kadanur Village Doddaballapur Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, and the names of Bylappa, son of Byranna and Channigappa, son of Doddachannarayappa were entered as joint o...

Manorama Vs. V. Mohammad and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2007ACJ810

K. Ramanna, J.1. This appeal is filed by the wife of late P. Shetty against the judgment and award passed in M.V.C. No. 1683 of 1994 by the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and Fourth M.A.C.T., Mangalore, whereby the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition filed by appellant in M.V.C. No. 1683 of 1994 on the ground that within 1 year of the death of her husband she married to some other person and, therefore, she is not entitled to any compensation. But the claim petition in M.V.C. No. 12 of 1995 filed by the parents of deceased P. Shetty was allowed in part awarding total compensation of Rs. 52,500 with interest at 6 per cent per annum. Therefore, the appellant in M.V.C. No. 1683 of 1994 has come up with this appeal.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the insurer, respondent No. 2.3. It is an admitted fact that late P. Shetty was the husband of the appellant herein. P. Shetty died in a motor vehicle accident on 14.11.1994 at 3.15 p.m. which took place between the vehicle, i.e.,...

S. Nagabhushana S/O N. Seetharama Vs. the Tahsildar

Court: Karnataka

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner, questioning the legality and validity of the endorsements dated 6th/31st August 2001 and 21st June 2002, both issued by Tahsildar, Sringeri Taluk, Sringeri, has presented the instant writ petition. Further, he has sought for a direction, directing the respondent to certify that, he belongs to 'Bhovi' caste.2. The only grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, petitioner had filed the application on 4th May 2001 for issuing the Caste Certificate, stating that, he belongs to 'Bhovi' caste, which is a recognised scheduled caste and that, the Caste Certificate had been earlier issued by the Tahsildar, Sringeri Taluk to that effect originally in favour of the father of petitioner on 7th July 1964 and thereafter, the Caste Certificate had also been issued to the petitioner also in the year 1990. Due to afflux of time, petitioner has lost the original Caste Certificate issued by the Tahsildar, on 7th June 1990. Thereafter, when pet...

Sri Ravindra S/O Chandrashekar Patwardhan, Vs. the Land Tribunal by It ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR3224; 2006(6)KarLJ328

ORDERV. Jagannathan, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioners' grievance is that the Land Tribunal, by its impugned order dated 9.10.2001, ought not to have granted occupancy rights in favour of R-3 in respect of the subject lands situated in Kagawada village in R.S.Nos. 10, 70, 71 and 66, measuring 5 acres 37 guntas, 5 acres 36 guntas, 14 acres 34 guntas and 9 acres 27 guntas of land respectively. The main ground urged before me by the learned Counsel for the petitioners Sri Balakrishna Shastry is that the Tribunal has granted occupancy rights in favour of R-3 mainly on the basis of the entries found in Diary Nos. 6613 and 6614 and since those entries have not been cancelled by any of the authorities, it is presumed that, as on 1.3.1974. R-3 was in occupation of the subject lands. It is the submission of the learned Counsel that the petitioners have challenged the very entries mainly on the ground that the signatures found in the above said entries were forged...

Sri Sadashiva Mahaganapathi Temple Represented by Sole Hereditary Trus ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(6)KarLJ295

ORDERR. Gururajan, J. 1. Sri Sadashiva Mahaganapathi Temple of Suratkal is before me in WP No. 17426 Of 2004 challenging the order of the Land Tribunal, Mangalore dated 8.2.1977. Petitioner is also challenging the order dated 11.2.2006 passed by the Land Tribunal, Moodabidri and is also assailing the correctness of the order dated 8.2.1977 passed by the Land Tribunal, Mangalore in LRT(2) No. 1379/76-77.2. Petitioner temple is one of the oldest temples and is governed by the provisions of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1951. Petitioner temple is the absolute owner of the property bearing Sy.No. 141/23 measuring 0.89 acres. The above property has been in actual enjoyment and possession of the petition temple since several decades, including as on 1.3.1974. The land in question is a non-agricultural Punja land. It was never tenanted to any one much less to one Devaki. The second respondent Devaki applied for grant of occupancy rights in respect of a portion of th...

Sri B. Bava (Since Deceased by His Lrs Mrs. Aisamma Wife of Late B. Ba ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(4)KarLJ707

ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Legal Representatives of Sri B. Bava are before this Court challenging the order dated 25.10.1978 passed by the Land Tribunal, Mangalore in this writ petition.2. Petitioner late Bava was in possession and enjoyment of 5 cents of land in Survey No. 25B-1A of Battaya Koppala of Maloor village. He was residing in a farmhouse situated in the land in question for several years. Respondent No. 3, now deceased, filed an application for registration of occupancy rights in respect of Survey No. 25B, measuring 25 cents. Respondent No. 3 claimed 5 cents of land which was in possession of the petitioner. Petitioner applied only for 5 cents along with the farmhouse which was in his possession. An application was filed before the Land Tribunal, and the Land Tribunal without issuing notice to the petitioner granted occupancy rights in favour of Respondent No. 3. The said order was challenged in this Court in Writ Petition No. 16801 of 1983. In the light of constitution of the ...

Workmen of Manipal Printers and Publishers Limited Represented by the ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR2821

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. The petitioner Association is a union of workmen of the second respondent establishment. The first respondent is a publisher and the second respondent is a printer. The first respondent publishes the following:1) 'Udayavani', a daily newspaper, since the year 1970;2) 'Tushara', a weekly since the year 1973;3) 'Taranga' a monthly, since the year 1983; and,4) 'Rooptara', a film monthly, since the year 1977.The second respondent was engaged as a printer by the first respondent2. The Government of India appointed a Wage Board for non-journalist employees of the newspaper industry in November 1975, under Section 17 of the Working Journalists and other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Services) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (Act 45 of 1955) and the said Wage Board made recommendations in respect of interim wages, to the Government of India which accepted the recommendations by an order dated 01.04.1977. The Government of India thereafter constituted a Tr...

U.T. Rdhakrishna Rao S/O U. Thimmaiah Vs. M. Venkappayya Nayak S/O Ram ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(5)KarLJ174

ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. This petition is filed by Sri. U.T. Radhakrishna Rao challenging the order of the Land Tribunal dated 6.9.1985, Annexure 'G' passed by the 3rd respondent in case No. 21/81-82.2. The petitioner is the owner in possession of Sy. No. 28/1 including 10 cents of lands in Sy. No. 28/1P1 now granted in favour of the 1st respondent. The father of the petitioner built a structure which is by the side of the road in Sy. No. 28/1 in 1965. The said structure was leased for the purpose of running a hotel in favour of the 1st respondent. Respondent No. 1 is running a hotel and a provision store in the said structure. He was residing elsewhere with the members of his family. The said structure occupies about 3 cents of land only without any appurtenant land to the said structure as the structure is by the side of a High Way. The 1st respondent is not an agricultural labour. The first respondent filed Form No. 7 claiming to be a chalageni tenant of the land in question. However...

Dastagir S/O AjamuddIn Jamadar Vs. Shivanand S/O Annasab Wali and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: IV(2006)ACC487; 2007ACJ1561; 2006(5)KarLJ43

ORDER1. In this appeal, the quantum of compensation awarded to the appellant for the injuries sustained by him is assailed mainly on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to award compensation under the head loss of future earning capacity as well as loss of amenities and for future medical treatment.2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Counsel for the insurance company and have examined the medical evidence placed before the Tribunal and discussed at paragraph 9 of the impugned judgment. We find that the appellant has been reduced to nothing insofar as his capability to lead a normal life is concerned and to carry on his occupation as mechanic. The medical evidence of the doctor placed before the Tribunal indicates that due to the pressure on spinal chord following the accident in question, the appellant has not been able to move both his upper and lower limbs and he is not able to hold bigger objects with the hands firmly and not able to mov...