Karnataka Court July 2006 Judgments

M. Millanna S/O Late G.S. Muniyappa Vs. R. Shankarlal S/O Ramachanderj ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR3188; 2006(4)KarLJ567

ORDERH.V.G. Ramesh, J.1. This is a revision petition filed under Section 46(1) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 (for short The Act) being aggrieved by the order of dismissal of the eviction petition filed by the landlord in HRC No. 1922/96.2. Landlord filed an eviction petition initially under Sections 21(1)(a)(b)(f)(h)(o)(p) of the act contending that tenant was in arrears of rent from February 1995 and that he had made material alterations to the property without the consent of the landlord and the premises was utilised for the purpose other than for which it was let out and that he has subleased the property. The landlord further contended that the petition premises is required by himself to accommodate his nephew. The petition was resisted by the tenant on all grounds. The trial Court after enquiry held that the tenant is not in arrears of rent and negatived all the contentions of the landlord, thereby dismissing the eviction petition. Hence this revision3. Heard counsel for the res...

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Sholapur Branch (Ms) Rep. by Its Admi ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2008ACJ222; 2008(6)KarLJ272; 2007(6)AIRKarR377; 2008AIHC439(Kar); 2008ACJ222

K. Ramanna, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and sward made by the additional Civil Judge, Bidar in MVC. No. 153/2001 on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-III, Bidar, whereby the Member of the Claims Tribunal directed the appellant Insurance Company to pay a global compensation of Rs. 2,05,200/-together with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit, to the respondent-claimants.2. Assailing the said judgment and award the Insurance Company has come up with this appeal mainly urging on the ground that the Court below committed an error in making the appellant liable to satisfy the award, even after the appellant proved the cancellation of the insurance policy by producing EXS.R-1 to R-8 and that it is not justified in adopting the negative approach to make the appellant liable to pay the compensation even in the absence of subsisting policy. It is the case of the appellant that the policy came to be ...

Puttaswamy S/O Late Kempaiah Vs. the State of Karnataka Represented by ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J. 1. The petitioner was appointed on 3.8.1974 as a Physical Culture Instructor. His salary was fixed as provided by the Circular issued by the Director of Collegiate Education dated 1.1.1975, By an order dated 6.9,1995, the Basic pay of the petitioner as on 31.12.1995 was shown as Rs. 4325/-, . On extension of the University Grants Commission scale from 1.1.1996, the petitioner was promoted to the Selection Grade oil 7.8.1990. As the petitioner had put in five years of service in the cadre of Selection Grade, his pay was fixed at Rs. 14,940/-. He was paid this scale till January, 2005. As was clear from the Government Order of 15.11.1999, that from 1.1.1996, University Grants Commission Scale of pay was extended to teachers, Librarians and Physical Education Directors of Aided Colleges of Education. According to the petitioner, the Government, by an order dated 17.11.1997, had directed that Physical Education Teachers, Director of Physical Culture Instructors wor...

The Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer Vs. Jayaram ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2006)204CTR(Kar)447; [2006]286ITR403(KAR); [2006]286ITR403(Karn)

R. Gururajan, J. 1. Revenue is before us seeking an order to set aside the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 21.10.1000 in ITA No. 276/Bang/92 and the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I for the assessment year 1970-71, and to set aside the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 21.10.1999 bearing ITA No. l50/Bang/92, by confirming the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer in respect of both the assessment years.2. Following questions of law arise for our consideration:(1) Whether the redemption fine of Rs. 2,00,000/-paid by the assessee in respect of Assessment Year 1977-78 to the excise authorities for the infraction of law to release the seized goods, can be treated as business expenditure(2) Whether the tribunal even before deciding the issue is correct in holding that in respect of penalty paid for the infraction of law two views are possible and therefore the one favourable to the assesses should be taken(3) Whether the Tribunal w...

A.K. Mohammed Rafeek Son of Abdul Kareem Major Vs. Sri Adhip Chauduri ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006CriLJ3751; ILR2006KAR2945; 2006(5)KarLJ151

ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioner Mohammed Rafeek is seeking for a writ of habeas corpus or any other writ or order calling for the records for the records connected with the order bearing No. HTD/08/2003 dated 21.8.2003, issued by the first respondent as specially empowered officer under the provisions of the COFEPOSA and to quash the said order, and set the detenu at liberty in the case on hand.2. Petitioner states that his brother, detenu in this case, has studied upto X standard in a Government School in Tamil Nadu. He hardly knows Kannada or English. It is stated in the grounds of detention that the detenu had arrived from Singapore as passenger and landed at Bangalore International Airport on 13.6.2003. Detenu was carrying only one bag and he had left the said bag in 3rd cubicle in the toilet area of the International Airport and went out of the airport.3. Senior Intelligence Officers along with Mahazar witnesses kept a watch on the front exit gate of Arrival Hall of Bangalore I...

The Union of India (Uoi) Represented by the Commissioner of Central Ex ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(201)ELT559(Kar)

1. The Union of India is before us raising the following questions of law in para 17 in the light of the order of the Tribunal dated 9.8.2005 passed in Excise Appeal No. 934/2004 on the file of the Customs, Excise and service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore.a) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in ordering for refund even if there is no provision in Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2002, to refund the unutilized Credit?b) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in ordering for refund even if there is no production and there is no clearance of finished goods?c) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in holding that respondent is entitle for refund even if it goes out of Modvat Scheme or Company is closed?2. Respondent-company is engaged in manufacture of shoes for M/s. Bata India Ltd. They are registered under the Central Excise Registration. The respondent surrendered their ...

B.H. Mahadevappa S/O Late Hanumaiah and Dorai Raj S/O Late Marimuthu V ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR3405

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. The first petitioner joined the services of the respondent during November, 1967 on daily wage basis as a Temporary Time Roll employee (hereinafter referred to as 'the TTR' for brevity). Later he was selected and absorbed into regular service of the respondent as on 30.11.1974. The second petitioner had joined the services of the petitioner during February, 1966 on daily wages as a TTR employee and he was selected and absorbed into regular service in November, 1974. Both the petitioners retired from service on 31.8.1998 and 31.12.1996, respectively. The respondent has been paying pension which was under the provisions of the Karnataka Electricity Board Employees Service Regulations, (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations' for brevity) and which was fixed reckoning their services only from the date of their absorption. It is the petitioner's case that the first petitioner had rendered total service of seven years in TTR prior to his absorption and similar...

Sri T.H. Venkate Gowda Vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Court: Karnataka

ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. Petitioner is a Civil Contractor at Mandya. He is registered as a dealer under the Sales Tax Laws. During the assessment year 1996-97 petitioner executed certain civil works for the irrigation department of Government of Karnataka and received a sum of Rs. 31,85,983/- as consideration. Some of the contracts executed involved use of material as also labour, while some contracts were pure labour contracts such as earthwork excavation without involving use of any materials. Petitioner opted for composition assessment under Section 17(6) of the Act and filed return in form No. 8 and produced certificates issued by the irrigation department in support of the works executed and the amounts received. The assessing authority verified the same and considered that out of Rs. 15,27,866/- related to pure contracts that did not involve use of any material and therefore outside the purview of taxation. The balance receipts at Rs. 16,58,117/- that involved use of materials was...

State of Karnataka by Its Secretary to Govt., Finance Department Vs. E ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. This petition is directed against the order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dated 21-2-1997.2. Respondent is a dealer engaged in the activity of manufacturing extraction of edible oil from oil seeds such as groundnut. For the assessment year 1988-89, the assessment was concluded under Section 12(7) of the Act on 25-4-1996. The assessing authority having found that there was escapementof turnover liable to tax, re-opened the assessment and proceeded to pass an order of re-assessment dated 21-2-1997. The assessee preferred an appeal against the re-assessment order. The said appeal was allowed in part. A second appeal was filed before the appellate tribunal. The tribunal allowed the appeal in part by an order dated 27-1-2002. Aggrieved by the said order, State is before us by raising the following questions of law;Whether the tribunal is not bound to give a finding of fact in allowing the appeals on a disputed questions of fact held against the assessee by the assessing author...

Smt. Uma W/O Late Chakravarthy Vs. State of Karnataka - by Sub-inspect ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006CriLJ3761; 2006(4)KarLJ661

H.V.G. Ramesh, J.1. Criminal Petition 640/2006 is filed seeking to relax the condition imposed by the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore while ordering releasing of the seized property in favour of the petitioner and also to set aside the order dated 1.12.2005 -annexure A in CC 5866/1990.2. Criminal Petition 2964/2006 is filed by the State seeking to set aside the order dated 11.4.2005 in CC 5866/1990 passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore allowing the application filed by the respondents Under Section 451 and 457, Cr.PC.3. One Smt Uma W/o Chakravarthy a resident of Kolathur in Dharmapuri District filed a petition. It is her case that the Srirampuram Police had registered a case against her husband in Crime No. 428/1988 Under Section 41(d) r/w Section 102, Cr.PC alleging that he was in possession of diamond stones without any proper documents for the possession of the same and they had seized 1246 stones of 84 carats 97 cents and 139 stones of assorted sizes...