Karnataka Court January 2009 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.
Cement Sales Corporation Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxe ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-2009
Reported in: (2009)23VST210(Karn)
ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, at the outset submitted that, she does not press prayers (a) to (r) sought in the petition for the present and the instant writ petition is confined only so far as prayers (s) and (t) are concerned. The submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner as stated above, is placed on record and the writ petition is limited to only so far as prayers (s) and (t) are concerned.2. The prayer (s) sought in the writ petition is to quash the impugned endorsement dated September 12, 2007, vide annexure F bearing No. ACCT. ADT. 1/CR-94/2006-07 issued by the first respondent and the prayer (t) sought is to direct the first respondent to consider the application vide annexure E dated September 4, 2007, filed under Section 69 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, in terms of Section 30(3) and after affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate the claim, in the interest of justice and equity.3. The only g...
The Director General, India Council of Agricultural Research and ors. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(6)KarLJ538:2009(4)AIRKarR170(D.B)
ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This writ petition is filed by respondents in Original Application No. 270 of 2007 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench (hereinafter called as the CAT) being aggrieved by the order dated 20-6-2008 wherein the CAT has allowed the application filed by respondent 1 herein and has set aside the impugned order and directed the respondents to reinstate the applicant in service with all consequential benefits together with continuity of service.2. The respondent 1 herein filed O.A. No. 270 of 2007 on the file of the CAT being aggrieved by the order dated 23-1-2007 wherein the applicant was relieved from service granting disability pension on the ground of medical disability. Respondent 1 herein was working as a Security Supervisor and he joined service on 5-12-1991 in the office of the second respondent in the application. In the month of December 2004, he suffered a mild heart attack and he underwent Coronery Artery Bypass performed on ...
Leo Granex Vs. Pavillion Granites and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-27-2009
Reported in: ILR2009(4)KAR4062
ORDERJawad Rahim, J.1. Complainant is in revision under Sections 397 and 401, Cr.P.C. questioning the legality and sustainability of the order dated 29.5.2006 passed in C.C. 14009/03 on an application filed under Section 259, Cr.P.C. filed by the 3rd respondent seeking conversion of Trial from summary case to one of warrant case.2. Heard the Learned Counsel on both sides. The matter is admitted and taken up for final disposal with consent.3. The contextual facts are:a) Petitioner herein initiated prosecution against the respondents by a petition under Section 200, Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act, for short) on the premise that respondent No. 1, a proprietary concern, had business transaction with it and in relation thereto, issued a cheque in a sum of Rs. 8,10,00,000/- towards discharge of the debt and legal liability. The said cheque on presentation, was dishonoured for 'insufficiency of funds' and co...
L.A. Krishnappa Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KarLJ697
ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.2. The petition coming on for preliminary hearing is considered for final disposal having regard to the facts and circumstances.3. The facts of the case are as follows.--The petitioner is the owner of 4 acres 39 guntas in Survey No. 59 of Lakshmipura Village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The land has been classified as consisting of pot kharab(a) land to the extent of 2 acres 10 guntas and the remaining land is 2 acres 29 guntas. The petitioner has been cultivating the entire land as owner thereof. The pot kharab (a) land is a part of survey number and is in his possession and is not reserved for any public purpose and had not been occupied by a road, footpath, tank or stream and neither used for a burial ground nor assigned for potteries. It is only classified as being unfit for agriculture. Nevertheless the petitioner is occupying the entire land classified as pot kharab (a) for...
Govind Ram Chanani Authorised Representative of Alloy Steel Emporium V ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-23-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ2154; 2009(3)KarLJ253
K. Ramanna, J.1. All these appeals filed by the appellant - Govind Ram Chan and stated to be the authorised representative of M/s. Alloy Steel Emporium, Mathikere, Bangalore under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 8-2-2005 passed by the 18th Addl. CMM & 20th ASCJ, Bangalore in C.C. Nos. 29538/99, 29138/99, 29139/99, 28960/99, 29540/99, 29137/99, 28961/99 & 29539/99 allowing I.A. filed by die respondents/accused in the respective cases and consequently acquitted the respondents.2. The case of the appellant is that appellant-Govind Ram Chanani described himself as a proprietor, M/s. Alloy Steel Emporium issued legal notice to respondents calling upon them to make good the cheque amount issued by them in favour of M/s. Alloy Steel Emporium but dishonoured by their banker for insufficient funds. The respondents did not comply with the demand of notice. Therefore, appellant filed complaints against respondents for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Inst...
Sri Rajendra Kumar Goyal S/O Late Sri Jeevanram Goyal Proprietor Sree ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-23-2009
Reported in: ILR2009KAR2029; 2009(5)KarLJ98
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner's application dated 0.5.2003 for allotment, of 6752 sq. mtrs. of land in plot; No, 14-P Jigani industrial area, 1st Phase, to establish an industry for cutting and polishing granite slabs and tiles was returned by the 1st respondent KIADB informing the petitioner that the said plot of land was earmarked for sale by public auction to be notified and published in the newspaper, by letter dated 9.9.2005 Annexure-B. It is the allegation of the petitioner that the 1st respondent processed the 2nd respondent's application dated 24.9.2005 and allotted by way of a lease-cum-sale basis, the said plot of land by letter dated 29.10.2005 Annexure-C followed by execution of the agreement dated 22.12.2005 Annexure-D, to set up a granite cutting and polishing industry. The petitioner's written requests dated 28.8.2006 Annexure-E, and 13.9.2006 Annexiire-1% to furnish copies of the documents of allotment, were responded to by the 1st respondent furnishing a co...
Sri Srikanth S/O Sri V. Manjunath Vs. Smt. P.B. Nandhini W/O Sri Srika ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-23-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Kant1; ILR2009KAR2386; 2009(5)KarLJ180
K.L. Manjunath, J.1. Though the matter is listed for admission by consent of parties on both sides, the appeal is heard on merits.2. The appellant is challenging the legality and correctness of the Judgment and Decree passed by the 1 Addl. Prinicipal Judge, Family Court dated 4.3.2008 in M.C. No. 502/2004 wherein the Family Court has dismissed the petition filed by the appellant herein under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act to dissolve the marriage which was solemnized on 24.3.2003.3. The facts leading to this case are as hereunder:The parties are Hindus. Their marriage was solemnized at Bangalore on 24.3.2003. Since the appellant was working in U.S.A.; immediately after marriage the parties lied together at Fort Wayne in U.S.A. According to the petition averments ever since the mamage, his wile was not co-operating with him in domestic affairs and she was not showing any interest in the day-today activities and that she was not discharging her matrimonial obligations. On the other...
Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. M.N. Chari
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-22-2009
Reported in: [2009]310ITR445(KAR); [2009]310ITR445(Karn)
Deepak Verma, J.1. Heard Sri M.V. Seshachala, learned Counsel for the appellants on admission.2. This appeal is at the instance of the Revenue preferred under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench 'A' on December 12, 2007, in I.T.A. No. 553/Bang/2006 for the assessment year 2003-04. The appeal before the Tribunal was also at the instance of the Revenue.3. According to the appellant, the following substantial question of law would arise for consideration by this court:Whether the appellate authorities were correct in holding that the belated payment of the employer's contribution to provident fund beyond the stipulated period under the said Act, cannot be treated as the income of the assessee under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Act as held by the Assessing Officer in view of the amendment to Section 43B of the Act?4. However, it has not been disputed before us, that the said question...
B. Krishna Bhat Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-22-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KarLJ702
D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. Since common questions arise for consideration in both the cases, they are heard together and by consent, they are taken up for final disposal.2. These public interest litigations are filed seeking appropriate writ or direction to the State of Karnataka to take immediate action to put an end to the strike by doctors working in the Government Hospitals and to issue a direction that the persons practicing medicine cannot go on strike affecting the general public. The prayers also include seeking direction to the State Government and the Ministry of Health and Family Planning to take appropriate disciplinary proceedings against the erring doctors who have acted against the medical ethics and public interest and to deal with them, in accordance with law; to declare that the strike called upon by the Karnataka Medical Officers' Association, Victoria Hospital, Bangalore, is illegal unconstitutional and that they have no right to abstain from medical service to which they...
S. Prasanna Kumar Vs. R. Saraswathi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-22-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Kant109; 2009(2)KarLJ663; ILR2009(1)Kar878; 2009(4)KCCR2729; 2009(2)KLJ663; 2009(3)AIRKarR177
ORDER1. Appellant was the petitioner before II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore. He filed the aforesaid petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 requesting the Court to dissolve the marriage solemnised between the appellant and respondent on 18-11-1993 at Lalithmahal Kalyana Mantapa, New BEL Road, Bangalore.2. As per the petition averments, marriage between the parties was solemnised on 18-11-1993 at Bangalore and after the marriage parties lived together in the house of the father of the petitioner and immediately after the marriage respondent-wife demanded petitioner to permit her to continue her studies since she was studying in II year B. Com. at the time of marriage. Petitioner agreed and permitted the respondent to complete her B. Com. Degree. After completion of her graduation; she requested the petitioner to permit her to join computer classes. Petitioner agreed to send her to computer classes. According to him, she started ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »