Karnataka Court April 2008 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.
B. Thippeswamy Vs. Goramma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-04-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR3716
ORDERA.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.1. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. 123/2004 pending on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Challakere, filed against the respondent, to pass a judgment and decree directing the defendant to redeem the mortgage property by paying loan amount of Rs. 77,800/- with future interest, failing which, to sell the suit schedule property in public auction for realising the amount. Respondent has contested the suit. Based on the pleadings, trial Court has framed issues on 28.06.2005. During the course of trial of the suit question arose, as to whether the mortgage deed produced by plaintiff should be received in evidence. Since it was noticed that, the deed was an unregistered deed. After hearing learned Counsel on both sides about admissibility of the mortgage deed in evidence, trial Court has held that the deed is inadmissible in evidence. Questioning the said order, this writ petition has been filed.2. Sri B.M. Siddappa, learned Counsel appearing for the pe...
Nanjappa Vs. Nanjappa, Since Deceased by His Lrs.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-04-2008
Reported in: ILR2009KAR60:2009(1)KCCR192:2009(1)AIRKarR259.
D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This second appeal by the defendant in O.S. No. 18/1995 though arises out of a very simple matter, a suit for recovery of possession and both the Courts below have concurrently held against the defendant in decreeing the plaintiff's suit for recovery of possession, is a typical example of how Courts can go wrong if evidence on record is either not taken into consideration or if the pleadings are not considered in the proper perspective and relevant issues are not framed in the context of the pleadings. This case serves as an ideal example of the courts below not bestowing their attention to the controversy in the suit. The dispute which arises between the parties, which is required to be examined is a typical example of ignoring relevant material on record, a typical example of over-looking admissions made by the plaintiff in the course of his deposition and arrive at an inference which was impossible to arrive at, vitiating the judgment not only of the trial...
Bhawaralal (Huf) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-03-2008
Reported in: (2008)219CTR(Kar)300; [2009]177TAXMAN541(Kar); 2008(5)AIRKarR46(DB)
Anand Byrareddy, J.1. These appeals are by assessees who belong to the same family. Being aggrieved by a common order, they have preferred these separate appeals. As the issues and questions of law that arise for consideration are identical, the appeals are disposed of by this common Judgment.2. The facts as are relevant for consideration of these appeals are as follows:The appellants had, as co-owners of a commercial complex, carried out construction thereof and had declared a total cost of construction in their respective returns of income for the asst. yr. 1993-94 at Rs. 42,68,642. Whereas the estimation framed by the DVO was at Rs. 62,27,795. Therefore, Rs. 19,59,150 was treated as unexplained income, equally in the hands of the three appellants.3. And further, the appellants had received a sum of Rs. 16,85,000 as co-owners from their tenant who had occupied two shop units separated by a common wall--the above amount was paid as consideration for permitting the tenant to create an ...
Khaitan Electricals Ltd. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-02-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR3370; 2009(2)KarLJ64; 2008(3)KCCR1616; 2008(4)AIRKarR373; AIR2008Kar168; 2008AIHC2985(Kar)
ORDERA.S. Bopanna, J.1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for issue of writ of certiorari to quash the compounding notices in case No. 61687 dated 20.1.2005 and 18.2.2005 which are impugned at Annexure-A and Al. The petitioner has also sought for a writ to declare Rule 6(1)(d) of Standard Weights and Measures(package and commodities) Rules 1977 ('the Rules' for short) as ultravires of the Standard Weights and Measures (package and commodities) Act, 1976 ('the Act' for short).2. The case of the petitioner is that they are engaged in selling ceiling fans all over the country including Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. The petitioner packs the ceiling fans in two separate packages. The main motor with rod and shackles etc is packed in one package without the blades. The blades are packed separately. The main motor with top and bottom canopies are packed in square corrugated box package. The base area of package is left blank. All the four side areas of the package has been reserved ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Wipro Finance Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-02-2008
Reported in: (2008)218CTR(Kar)105; [2009]176TAXMAN233(Kar)
Arali Nagaraj, J.1. In these two appeals, the appellant-Revenue has challenged legality and correctness of two orders dt. 12th Dec, 2003 (for the asst. yr. 1996-97) and dt. 3rd June, 2004 (for the asst. yr. 1997-98) passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore 'A' Bench and C Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) respectively in ITA Nos. 794/Bang/2000 and 795/Bang/2000. The Respondent assesses is common in these two appeals and, though the appellant-Revenue has raised for our consideration and decision as many as three substantial questions of law in IT Appeal No. 106 of 2004 and four such questions in IT Appeal No. 633 of 2004, one of them is common in both the appeals. These substantial questions of law are reframed without affecting the substance of each of them and they read as under:(1) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the disallowances of depreciation as made by the AO under Section 14...
Shaheed Ahmed Vs. Shankaranarayana Bhat and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-01-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1448; ILR2008KAR3277; ILR2008(3)Kar3277; 2008(4)KCCR2305; 2008(5)AIRKarR460; AIR2008NOC2694
Mohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. This Appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal below.2. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of both parties and perused the material on record.3. Due to the accident that occurred on 29.11.2004, the claimant-appellant suffered comminuted segmental fracture of shaft upper 3rd right femur with posterior crucial ligament injury on the right knee. The claimant was inpatient in Mallya Hospital for 11 days and he underwent two surgeries with internal fixations on 30.11.2004 and 10.12.2004. The Tribunal in all has awarded compensation of Rs. 61,000/-.4. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head of medical expenses on the ground that the claimant got reimbursement of the money spent by him for medical expenses under a Mediclaim policy. However, only an amount of Rs. 5,000/- is awarded towards incidental expenses.5. The consolidated medical bill issued by Mallya Hospital, Bangalore, found...
Vikki @ Vijaykumar Vs. State of Harihar Town Represented by Its S.P.P.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-01-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3787; ILR2008KAR3344
V. Jagannathan, J.1. The appellant calls in question his conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of the I.P.C. and consequent sentence passed by the trial court.2. The prosecutrix aged 22 years, being employed as a sales girl, used to go to several places like Davanagere, Harihara and surrounding villages for the purpose of selling perfume sticks and, being a resident of Davanagere, she often used to go to Harihara to sell the perfume sticks to the shops which are situated in the temple road and in the process, she also went to the photo studio of the accused to sell the perfume sticks. Thus, acquaintance grew between the prosecutrix and the accused and both used to go to the hotel for taking coffee and other things and became friends in the process. The accused used to tell the prosecutrix that he is in love with her and tried to touch her body which was not liked by the prosecutrix and she even admonished the accused for his behaviour.3. The prosecutrix went...
Malu Sleepers Private Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Apr-01-2008
Reported in: 2009(6)KarLJ140:2009(1)KCCR107:AIR2009NOC638:2009(1)AIRKarR344.
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.2. The facts leading to filing of this petition can be summarised as follows:The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Bangalore. The company is engaged in carrying on business in manufacture of Prestressed Mono Block Concrete Sleepers, which are used by the Indian Railways for laying railway tracks.3. The first respondent is the Union of India represented by its Executive Director Track (M), Ministry of Railways, having its office at New Delhi. The first respondent floated a tender for manufacture and supply of 3,54,000 Mono Block Concrete Sleepers. The petitioner-company, which is in the business of manufacture of the said Concrete Sleepers submitted tender for manufacture and supply of required quantity. The first respondent accepted the tender submitted by the petitioner-company and placed an order for manufact...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›