Karnataka Court January 2009 Judgments

Ashish Kumar and anr. Vs. Mohammed Ali

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010ACJ14; 2009(4)KarLJ652

ORDERManjula Chellur, J.1. These two contempt proceedings are initiated contending that there is failure on the part of the respondent-contemners to comply with the orders dated 14-6-2004 and subsequent order dated 3-8-2004 in W.P. Nos. 22238 and 22239 of 2004.2. After initiation of contempt proceedings, notice was ordered to the respondents. Subsequently, in reply, the respondents appeared and filed their objection statement. Later on, this Court after hearing both the parties opined that there was prima facie material indicating disobedience of the orders passed by this Court dated 14-6-2004 and 3-8-2004, therefore charges have to be framed. Accordingly, charges were framed and evidence was also let in. When the matter was posted for hearing the arguments, the respondents took objection to the representation by the Counsel for the complainant Mr. Aditya Sondhi on the ground that Rule 11 of the High Court of Karnataka (Contempt of Court Proceedings) Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred t...

N.C. Gangaraju (Since Dead) by His L.Rs and anr. Vs. State of Karnatak ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ240:2009(5)AIRKarR31

1. The appellants have challenged the dismissal of their W.P. No. 26830 of 2002 (LR), praying to quash the order dated 28-6-2002 passed by the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this appeal are as under:The appellants were the petitioners before the learned Single Judge and the claimants before the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala, for grant of occupancy rights of the land bearing Sy. No. 125, measuring 1 acre 34 guntas of Nelamangala Village. It is the case of the appellants that the deceased N.C. Gangaraju and N.A. Ramaiah i.e., the predecessors of the appellants were cultivating the above said land as tenants prior to 1960. The land in dispute was an inam land attached to the Village Office of Talwar. The predecessors of respondents 3 to 10 herein were the inam holders. After the advent of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'KVOA Act' for short) with effect from 1-2-1963, the land stated above stood vested with th...

Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Bangalore Water Supply and Sew ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2009]319ITR176(KAR); [2009]319ITR176(Karn)

Deepak Verma, J.1. Sri M. V. Seshachala, learned Counsel appeared on behalf of the appellants.2. Heard on admission. Records perused.3. The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the order dated September 28, 2007, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench 'B', in appeal I. T. A. No. 605/Bang/07 for the assessment year 2004-05, which was an appeal preferred by the respondent/assessee herein.4. The respondent/assessee was in appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, wherein several questions were raised. According to the assessee, it was being assessed and granted exemption under Section 10(20) of the Act. In view of this provision, the assessee filed claim of registration under Section 12A of the Act. The Director of Income-tax (Exemptions) recorded a finding that the assessee is not entitled to deduction under Section 10(20) of the Act, as it does not f...

In Re: Titan Holdings Limited

Court: Karnataka

ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. This petition is filed under Sections 391 - 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') to obtain sanction of this Court, to the Scheme of Amalgamation of the petitioner-company with Titan Industries Limited.The petitioner-transferor company was incorporated on 10.3.1993 under the name of style of Tital Holdings Limited, having its registered office at Golden Enclave, Tower 'A', Airport Road, Bangalore-560 017. Clause 32 of the Memorandum of Articles of Association of the petitionver-company permits for amalgamation of the company. By virtue of the scheme of amalgamation, the petitioner-company is proposed to be amalgamated with Titan Industries Limited (transferee company).2. Main objects of the petitioner-transferor company as set out in the Memorandum of Association are to carry on the business as an investment and finance company and to provide finance or to make investment in shares, stocks, securities and to prov...

Onam Agarbathi Company Rep. by Its Partners, Sri. K.K. Rangaiah Vs. th ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2009)223CTR(Kar)465; ILR2009KAR1345

B.V. Nagarathna, J.1. This appeal is filed by the assessee calling in question the order of the Tribunal dated 21.4.2004 in ITA. No. 709/Bang/ 1998.2. The appellant/assessee is a partnership firm carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of Agarbatti under various brands. For the assessment year 1992-93 a return of income was filed declaring a loss of Rs. 25,70,965/- which was accepted under Section 143(1)(a) of the income Tax Act on 29.1.1993. Subsequently, a regular assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was made on 27.3.1995 determining the total loss at Rs. 1,29,495/- as against Rs. 25,70,965/-. In computing the regular assessment, certain additions were made. During the relevant assessment year the assessee firm claimed deduction of Rs. 21,91,867/- as commission to its agents. Out of which Rs. 7,34,713/- was paid to M/s. Rangashree Marketing Private Limited (M/s. R.M.C.) and Rs. 6,03,546/- was paid to M/s. Onam Marketing Company (M/s. O.M.C.). According to the assessee ...

S.V. Sreenivasulu S/O Late S.V. Chetty and ors. Etc. Etc. Vs. the Stat ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR1565:2009(2)KCCR898:2009(2)AIRKarR526

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. Common questions of fact and that of law arise for decision making, hence with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the petitions are clubbed together, finally heard and are disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioners are in possession of forest land in Bellary District to mine iron ore under registered lease deeds executed by the State of Karnataka. The State Government, by letter dt. 4/5.7.1974 imposed a lease rent of Rs. 250/- per acre (Rs. 625/- per hectare), per annum and by Govt. Order No. FEE 52-FM-94 dt. 21.5.1997 enhanced the lease rent to Rs. 5,000/- and in addition, imposed supervision charges at Rs. 187.50, per year, per hectare, of the leased land. By another Govt. Order bearing No. APG 69-FFM-96 dt 29.8.1997 the lease rent was revised thus:(a) for the first 5 years : Rs. 1,000/-(b) for the next 5-10 years : Rs. 2,000/-(c) from 10-15 years : Rs. 3,500/-(d) from 15th year onwards : Rs. 5,000/-3. Guidelines in the matter of recov...

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Regional Office Rep. by It ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR1149; 2009(2)KarLJ693:2009(1)KCCR517:2009(2)AIRKarR424

Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. This appeal is by the Insurance company challenging the quantum of compensation awarded in MVC No. 2335/04 by the IX Addl. Small Causes Judge and MACT-7, Bangalore. by order dated 26.6.06.2. In the accident that occurred on 21.3.04 around 12.20 noon the parents of the claimants deceased Leelavathi and her husband Govindaiah have died when they were proceeding on their Hero Honda motor cycle bearing No. KA02 EK 8766 as a rider and pillion rider near Begur cross. on N.H.48 wherein a Maruti Wagon R bearing No. KA 25 M 9031 came in a negligent manner and dashed to the motor cycle due to winch both of them tell down and succumbed to the injuries on the spot.3. The claim petition was tiled on behalf of the minors/claimants through their guardian. The Tribunal having framed relevant issues held that the accident was due to the negligence on the part of the driver of Maruti Wagon R in question and while assessing the compensation an amount of Rs. 8.89.000- has been awa...

First Leasing Company of India Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Comm ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2009)26VST460(Karn)

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner in this petition has sought for quashing the assessment order dated August 18, 2007, vide annexure C1 passed by the respondent under Section 12 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 for the assessment year 2004-05 and to quash the demand notice dated August 18, 2007, vide annexure C2 issued by the respondent.2. The only grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, the petitioner being a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, has filed its annual return for the assessment year 2004-05 on May 26, 2005, by declaring a total turnover of Rs. 4,08,76,657.92 and a taxable turnover of Rs. 69,20,409.84 thus claiming exemption in respect of a turnover of Rs. 3,39,50,248.05. Be that as it may, the Government of Karnataka has issued a notification dated March 31, 2006, under Section 12C(8) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act notifying that, the assessment of all the dealers in respect of any year up to the ye...

State of Karnataka and anr. Vs. Mohammed Shafi

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(2)KarLJ514; 2009(4)KCCR2654; 2009(3)AIRKarR450; AIR2009NOC1907(D.B)

P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.1. The appeal is directed against the order dated 15th April, 2008 made in Writ Petition No. 1116 of 2007 where the respondent-writ petitioner prayed to direct the respondent to fix the salary payable to the petitioner as Member of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission for the period from 23-1-2004 to 22-1-2007 in the manner analogous to the fixation of salary to the Members of the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes under the following facts and circumstances of the case.1.2 The respondent/writ petitioner was nominated as a Member of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission (for short hereinafter referred to as 'Commission') under the provisions of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission Act, 1994 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by notification dated 23-1-2004.1.3 Section 4 of the Act deals with the term of office and conditions of service of Chairman and Members of the Commission.1.4 Sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 4 of the ...

New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. V.i. Mathews and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR1694:2009(2)KCCR1518:2009(5)AIRKarR2:AIR2009NOC2478

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. One Rajji Mathews, was an inmate of the Maruthi car. The lorry belonging to the fourth respondent hit against the car resulting in the death of Rajji Mathews. The deceased was aged about 33 years. It is said that the deceased was Managing Director of a Company dealing in real estate development. The wife and the parents of the deceased had filed claim petition seeking compensation.2. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation to the petitioners and directed the insurer to pay the compensation. The insurer is in appeal. It is the contention of the insurer that the wife of the deceased is remarried and she is not entitled to claim compensation for loss of dependency. The widow after remarriage would be only entitled a global compensation. The decision of this Court in the case of Smt. Manorama alias Monica v. V. Mohammad and Ors. ILR 2006 Kar 3929, is relied on.3. The concept of dependency while awarding compensation is a notional concept. The fact of actual dependen...